Back
2005 Supreme(SC) 339
2005(2) Supreme 234
Supreme Court of India
(From Punjab and Haryana High Court)
B.P. Singh & Arun Kumar, JJ.
State of Haryana —Appellant
versus
Satish Kumar etc. —Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 1235 of 1999
Decided on 23-2-2005
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Appellant : Ms. Avneet Toor, Advocate for D.P. Singh and Vinay Kumar Garg, Advocates.
For the Respondents : Dr. Sumant Bharadwaj, A.C. Jain and Ms. Mridula Ray Bharadwaj, Advocates.
Headnote:Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954—Section 7/16—High Court after considering evidence found that no case was made out and acquitted respondent—No reason to interfere with order of acquittal. (Paras 2 & 3)
Judgment
B.P. Singh, J.—We have heard counsel for the appellant State and also perused the order of the High Court.
2. In a case under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) the High Court after considering the evidence on record found that the prosecution has not been able to make out a case under Section 16(1)(a)(ii) read with Section 7 of the Act. It accordingly allowed the appeal and acquitted the respondent.
3. We have gone through the material on record and heard counsel for the appellant. We find no reason to interfere with the order of acquittal.
These appeals are, therefore, dismissed.
Appeal dismissed.
****************
