HARMOHINDER KAUR SANDHU, J. - (1.) ON 28.6.1984 the Government Food Inspector inspected the premises of Brij Bhushan petitioner at village Boh and found him in possession of 5 kilograms of chilies powder for public sale. 450 grams of chillies powder was purchased for analysis which was sealed into three dry and clean bottles. One sealed bottle was sent for analysis to the Public Analyst, Haryana, Chandigarh who reported that the sample contained added oil Soluble red coal-tar dye. A, complaint was then presented in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ambala for trial of the petitioner for an offence under Section 7 read with Section 16 (1) (a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act.
(2.) ON 12-4-1985 a charge was framed against the petitioner and procedure of warrant trial was adopted. After recording evidence the trial Court convicted the petitioner vide order dated 19-1-1988. An appeal was preferred against this judgment which was allowed but the case was remanded to the trial Court to try the petitioner in a summary way. A notice was issued to the petitioner by the trial Court on 11-11-1988. The petitioner alleged that he was facing the ordeal of trial since June, 1984 and no witness had been examined by the prosecution after November, 1988 when notice was given to him. He thus invoked the inherent jurisdiction of his Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the complaint now pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ambala as the same amounted to an abuse of the process of the Court. In the return filed by the respondent it was contended that the sample of chilli powder then from the petitioner was found adulterated by Public Analyst, Haryana and the petitioner was being rightly prosecuted. The case was remanded when the petitioner filed an appeal against his conviction. No prejudice had been caused to the petitioner by chane of mode of trial from warrant summary trial. The delay in the disposal of the case occurred on account of strike by the lawyers at Ambala. The witnesses could not be examined as Natha Singh PW had been transferred and Dr. H.P. Goshal died in the month of April, 1992.
(3.) I have heard Mr. K.K. Aggarwal, Advocate, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Azad Singh, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana, for the respondent.;