Judgment

K. JAYACHANDRA REDDY, J.:- This appeal arising under Prevention of Food Adulteration Act is filed against the judgment of the Kerala High Court in Criminal Appeal No. 153 of 1982 (reported in (1986) 1 FAC 328 : (1986 Cri LJ 535)) and the main question that arises for consideration is whether Rule 7(3) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules is mandatory or only directory? The appellant Usman (A-1) was a vendor. On 4-10-1978, the Food Inspector P.W. 3 purchased six packets of Pan supari from him which were duly sampled and sent for analysis to the Public Analyst who received the same on 5-10-78. But the Analysts report was received by the Local Health Authority on 6-12-78 which was beyond 45 days. It was opined by the Analyst that the sample contained Saccharin, an artificial sweetener and thus adulterated. The Food Inspector filed a complaint on 15-12-1978 against the appellant (A-1) and also the manufacturer (A-2) and they were charged under S. 16(1)(a) (i) and (ii) read with Ss. 7(i) and (v) and 2(1a)(a) and (b) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. The First-Class Magistrate acquitted both of them mainly on the ground that rule 7(3) was violated inasmuch as th