- (1.) RAMESH Chand, petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 2-8-2002 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chandigarh, whereby prayer of the petitioner - accused for summoning manufacturer / dealer of perfect Soya Sauce as accused in terms of S. 20 - A of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') was dismissed.
(2.) IN order to decide the present controversy, a few facts need to be noticed. On 6-11-2000 at about 11.30 a.m. Food Inspector Bharat Kanojia, inspected the shop of the accused known as M/s. Chand Confectioners located in Booth No. 38, Sector 11 - D, Chandigarh. At the time of inspection, accused was found in possession of 10 sealed bottles of perfect Soya Sauce of 700 gms. each for public sale. In the presence of Bimlesh Kumar the Food Inspector purchased three bottles of Perfect Soya Sauce of 700 gms. each against the payment of Rs. 36/- for analysis. Seizure proceedings were completed at the spot in accordance with the prescribed procedure and the documents required were also prepared by him. One sample was sent to the Public Analyst, Punjab, Chandigarh who in his report stated that the product had not been labelled in accordance with the provisions of R. 32 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules). Thereafter, prosecution against the petitioner - accused was launched on the basis of complaint lodged by the Food Inspector in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chandigarh. During the pendency of the proceedings, the petitioner - accused filed application with a prayer to summon S.T.N. Foods Rampur Industries. Lawrence Road, New Delhi being the manufacturer of Perfect Soya Sauce and also the dealer Mr. G. S. Sodhi, Sodhi Traders, C and F Agent and Distributor based at Sector 41 - D, Chandigarh. Anil Bajaj is stated to be the proprietor of the manufacturing firm. Notice of the application was given to the complainant who stated that he has no objection to the summoning of the manufacturer / distributor / dealer in terms of the requirement of S. 20 - A of the Act. Thereafter, the petitioner - accused was allowed to examine Gurmeet Singh as AW 1 and himself as AW 2. Gurmeet Singh admitted that he is the supplier / dealer of S.T.N. Foods, Rampur Industries, New Delhi who had manufactured the Perfect Soya Sauce. Ramesh Chand in his deposition maintained that Perfect Soya Sauce was supplied to him by M/s. Sodhi Traders which is a partnership concern and on the basis of evidence so recorded, it was prayed on behalf of the petitioner - accused that the above named manufacturer and dealer be summoned. Taking notice of the evidence adduced on record, the Chief Judicial Magistrate came to the conclusion that the petitioner had failed to establish that he had purchased food articles in question from the dealer / distributor or manufacturer by producing a written warranty in the prescribed form as laid down in S. 19(2) of the Act and as the provisions of S. 20 - A of the Act cannot be read in isolation, no case for acceptance of his application is made out and consequently, it was dismissed. It is thereafter the present petition has been filed.
(3.) PRIMARY submissions made by the counsel for the petitioner - accused while challenging the legality of the order dated 2-8-2002 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chandigarh is that the trial Court failed to take into account the distinction between S.19 and S.20 - A of the Act because S. 19 of the Act was enacted so as to give protection to the accused facing prosecution to take defence available to him whereas provisions of S. 20 - A of the Act came to be introduced to allow the Court to implead the manufacturer / dealer independently as per requirements laid down in S.19 of the Act.;