SOBHAG MAL JAIN, J. - (1.) THIS appeal by the State is directed against the judgment dated 26th October, 1978, of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Doongar Pur, acquitting the accused respondent for the offence under Section 16(1)(a)(i) read with Section 7 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'.
(2.) A sample of Turmeric (Haldi) was taken by the Food Inspector, District Doongarpur from the shop of the respondent on December 17, 1975. On examination by the Public Analyst, the sample was found to be adulterated as it was heavily damaged by insects, although no insects were found present in the sample. The Chief Judicial Magistrate has acquitted the respondents on the ground that the prosecution failed to establish that the article was un -fit for human consumption. In my opinion the appeal deserves to be dismissed on the ground of delay. The sample was taken as back as December 27, 1975. The respondent was acquitted by the Chief Judicial Magistrate on October 26, 1978. The respondent has already suffered, a lot on account of the protracted proceeding extending in this case over 13 years. It would not advance the cause of justice and would rather thwart it if the acquittal of the respondent is reversed now after more than 13 years of the occurrence. That apart, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate in the present case has recorded a categorical finding that the prosecution bad failed to establish that the article of food, i.e. Haldi found was unfit for human -consumption. True, the public analyst has opined that it was insect infected but no insects were actually found present in the sample. The public analyst has not said a word to the effect that the insect infection of Turmeric(Haldi) had been rendered unfit for human consumption.
(3.) I am not inclined to interfere with the order of acquittal passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate now after 13 years of the occurrence. There is no substance in the appeal and the same is accordingly dismissed here by.;