Revati Mohite Dere, J.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. By this Appeal preferred by the State of Maharashtra, the Appellant has impugned the Order dated 29.12.2001 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate F.C., Chandgad, District - Kolhapur by which the Respondent - accused came to be acquitted, as the case was dismissed in default.

3. Learned APP submitted that though the case was adjourned from time to time, the dates were formal dates. He submitted that technically only on the previous date i.e. 22.11.2001 the Complainant was absent, pursuant to which, on the next date i.e. 29.12.2001, as the Complainant and the learned APP were absent, the case was dismissed in default and the Respondent - accused were acquitted of the offences.

4. Learned counsel for the Respondents opposes the Appeal. He submits that the Complainant was absent on several dates and as such, no interference is warranted in the impugned Order dated 29.12.2001.

5. Perused the papers.

6. The Complainant is the Food Inspector, who has lodged a complaint as against the Respondent - accused, alleging offences punishable under Sections 7(i) r/w. 2(ia)(a), 2(ia)(m) punishable under Section 16 of the Preve