M.M.PUNCHHI,J - (1.) THE petitioner was convicted under section 16 (1)(a)(i) read with section 7 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act on the complaint of Dr. M.L. Narang, Medical Officer, Primary Health Centre, Guruharsahai. He was convicted and sentenced by the trial Magistrate and his conviction and sentence was affirmed by the Court of Session.
(2.) THE only point urged by Mr. Navkiran Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, is that as is evident from the complaint filed by the Food Inspector, he had been sub delegated power to lunch prosecution by the Director of Health Services and such a course was not permissible, under the law. Reliance has been placed by him on A.K. Roy and another v. State of Punjab and others, 1986(2) Recent C.R 569. Mr. Bachittar Singh, learned counsel for the State, does not challenge this proposition. For the view taken in A. K. Roy's case (supra) the complaint filed by the Food Inspector was in excess of his authority, though he may be a Food Inspector for other purposes. For the said reason, inevitably, the conviction and sentence of the petitioner need be set aside. Accordingly, this petition is accepted and the conviction and sentence of the petitioner are set aside. Fine, if paid, be returned to him. Revision accepted.;