SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1979 Supreme(SC) 484

O.CHHINNAPPA REDDY, R.S.SARKARIA
State Of T. N. – Appellant
Versus
R. Krishnamurthy – Respondent


Advocates:
A.T.M.SAMPATH, A.V.RANGAM

JUDGMENT

CHINNAPPA REDDY, J.:—Gingelly oil mixed with 15% of groundnut oil was sold as gingelly oil by the respondent to the Food Inspector, Thanjavur Municipality: The defence of the respondent was that he kept the oil in his shop to be sold, not for human consumption, but, for external use. The trial Magistrate did not accept the defence. He convicted him under S. 16 (1) (a) (i) read with S. 2 (1) (a) of the Food Adulteration Act and sentenced him to suffer imprisonment till the rising of the Court and to pay a fine of Rs. 200. On appeal, the learned Sessions Judge accepted the defence of the respondent and acquitted him of the charge. According to the learned Sessions Judge, the respondent could not be convicted unless it was established that the sale of the gingelly oil was for human consumption. The State of Tamil Nadu preferred an appeal to the Madras High Court. The High Court confirmed the order of acquittal. The State of Tamil Nadu has filed this appeal by special leave of this Court. The learned counsel for the State of Tamil Nadu made it clear to us at the hearing that the State was not anxious, at this distance of time (the occurrence was on 26-5-69) to secure a convict


































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top