- (1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment dated November 25, 1981 of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jhunjhunu acquitting the accused-respondents of the offence under Section 7/16 (I) (c) and (d) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954.
(2.) THE case is more than 13 years old. According to the prosecution it was on December 16, 1976, that Harishanker, Food Inspector, went to the shop of the accused and wanted to purchase 375 grams of groundnut oil as sample. THE accused who are wholesale dealers refused to sell the oil in smaller quantity and offerred that the Food Inspector may purchase the groundnut oil in duly sealed packed tin. THE Food Inspector was not prepared to purchase the entire sealed tin. The Chief Judicial Magistrate has held that the accused cannot be said to have prevented the Food Inspector from taking the sample as they were prepared to sell the sealed tin. They wanted to sell groundnut oil in the condition in which they had purchased it from the manufacturers. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, in this connection, has relied on the judgments of R. J. Gujar vs. Jamnadas Gopalji (1) and Saidu Mohammed vs. Food Inspector (2 ). Both these cases are applicable to the present case. I do not find any error in the judgment of the Chief Judicial Magistrate to warrant interference with the order of acquittal. The Food Inspector, has, in terms, admitted that he did not find oil at the shop in a open tin. All the tins were duly packed. The accused were wholesale dealers and they were, therefore, fully justified in insisting that the Food Inspector, if he wanted to purchase the oil, he had to purchase the entire tin in the packed condition in which they had received it from the manufacturers. In my opinion the offence under Section 16 (1) (c) and (d) of the Act has not been made out against the accused.) There is no merit in the present appeal and the same is hereby dismissed. .;