MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI AND ANOTHER Vs. DARSHAN LAL SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is against an order of acquittal passed by Shri Rajinder Nath Aggarwal. Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi, on Feb. 3, 1967.

(2.) It is necessary to state certain facts relating to the case. On April 12, 1966, Shri Jamuna Pershad, Food Inspector, purchased a quantity of Patessa sweets from Shri Darshan Lal. The latter was selling sweets at shop No. 217, street No. 18, Shanti Nagar, Delhi. The sample of sweets on being sent to the Public Analyst was found to be adulterated due to the presence of unpermitted colour.

(3.) On the basis of the report of the Public Analyst the Municipal Corporation of Delhi, through Shri Ved Prakash, Assistant Municipal Prosecutor, filed a complaint against Darshan Lal, under Sec. 7 read with Sec. 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954. Shri C.R. Negi, Magistrate First Class, Delhi, after trying the complaint convicted the vendor of sweets and sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for a term of six months and fine of Rs. 1,000.00 and in default of the payment of fine to further rigorous imprisonment for four months. On appeal, however, the Additional Sessions Judge set aside the conviction and the sentence after holding that Shri Jamuna Pershad had not been validly appointed as a Food Inspector and the sale of the sweets to him could not be treated as a sale to a person other than the Food Inspector. The learned Additional Sessions Judge further seems to have been of the opinion that where purchase is made by a person other than a Food Inspector, cognisance can only be taken on the complaint of that person.