MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI Vs. AMAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In all the above appeals, the acquittal of the respondents for offence punishable under Section 7 read with Section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, (for short the Act) has been challenged. A preliminary objection, however, has been raised by the respondents that the appeals are barred by limitation as the applications seeking special leave to appeal were filed after the expiry of sixty days computed from the date of the orders of acquittal. The case of the appellants is that the applications are to be held to have been filed by a public servant and, therefore, those could have been and were in fact filed within six months of the dates of orders of acquittal.

(2.) It is also admitted that in all these cases the Food Inspectors of the Corporation had lifted the samples for analysis after 1st April, 1976. This date is relevant as Section 20 of the said Act was amended w.e.f. that date. Prior to the amendment, the Corporation being the local authority', was entitled to institute the complaint.

(3.) In the present cases the complaints were filed by the State and the Corporation through Shri R.N. Gujral, Assistant Municipal Prosecutor, Municipal Corporation of Delhi. He had been authorised to institute and conduct prosecution and other legal proceedings. In this respect it is useful to quote paragraph 4 of the complaint averred in practically each complaint