P. RAMACHANDRA RAJU, J.

( 1 ) THIS is an appeal by the State against the acquittal of the respondent who was prosecuted on a charge tbat on 11-5-1974, at about 10. 30a. m. at Sardar Vallabhai Patel Market, Visakhapatnam, out of the sweets In her possession exposed for sale, the respondent sold 600 grams of sweets in three packets containing 200 grams for Rs. 6/ for purposes of analysis and that on analysis by the Public Analyst the sample was found to have been adulterated having contained Rhodamin B and non-permitted yellow coaltar dye.

( 2 ) IT is not in dispute that P. W. I, the Food Inspector purchased the samples from the stocks of the respondent which were exposed for sale. However, the learned Magistrate did not find the respondent guilty on the ground that the report of the Public Analyst could not be relied upon for the reason that the purchase for purposes of analysis was not made from the same packet hut three separate packets each containing 200 grams were purchased by P W I, from the respondent. But the learned Magistrate overlooked rule 22-A of the Prevention of Food adulteration, Rules which is as follows:"where food is sold or slocfced for sale or for distribution in

Click Here to Read the rest of this document