D.S. Tewatia, J. - (1.) THESE are six Criminal Appeals Nos. 54, 55, 148, 149, 164 and 303 of 1970 filed at the instance of the Municipal Committee, Amritsar. In all except Criminal Appeal No. 55 of 1970 the orders of acquittal are passed by the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Amritsar. In Criminal Appeal No. 55 of 1970, the order of acquittal is that of the Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar, dated 3rd July, 1969. In all the aforesaid criminal appeals a common question of law is involved and hence we propose to decide all of them by this judgment.
(2.) THE Respondents in all the appeals, except in Criminal Appeal No. 55 of 1970, were acquitted by the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Amritsar, while in Criminal Appeal No. 55 of 1970 the Respondent was convicted by the trial Court, but was acquitted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar, - -vide his judgment dated 3rd July, 1969. However, in Criminal Appeal No. 149 of 1970, the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Amritsar, found the Respondent guilty under Section 16(1)(a)(ii) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and accordingly convicted him, but having regard to the nature of the offence proved on a technical ground, he took a lenient view in the matter of sentence and fined Sikandar Lal, Respondent Rs. 200 and imprisonment till the rising of the Court. In default of payment of fine, he ordered the Respondent to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for two months. Half of the fine, if realised, was also ordered to be paid to the present Appellant. The other Respondent Darshan Lal was, however, acquitted. It may be stated here that the Respondents (in all the six appeals) have been acquitted on a technical and legal plea that Toria oil, at the time when the samples of the said oil were purchased by the Food Inspector from their shops in accordance with the provisions of law, did not come within the purview of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (Act 37 of 1954), hereinafter called the Act, and that it can neither be considered an edible oil in terms of the Act and the Rules made thereunder called the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955, hereinafter referred to as the Rules, nor is it necessary for Toria oil found in possession of the Respondents to conform to any standard.
(3.) THE plea prevailed, in all the cases, with the Courts below and hence these appeals to this Court.;