The certificate issued by the Director of the Central Food Laboratory under Section 13(2-B) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act supersedes the report of the Public Analyst under Section 13(1) and Section 13(3) unconditionally.

( 1 ) THESE two revision petitions involving the same question of Law against two different orders dated 23-5-93 of Shri B. C. Biswas, the learned Sr. Municipal Magistrate, Calcutta in Case No. 13-D/91 and 14-D/91 have been filed for quashing the proceeding of these two cases as the Ld. Municipal Magistrate, Calcutta refused to discharge the petitioners.

( 2 ) SHRI S. K. Basu, Food Inspector inspected the premises of the accused Jogmohan Singh, Proprietor of J. M. R. B. and Co. , Highwala 13, B Kashinath Mallic Lane, Calcutta-73 on 16/01/1991 and took samples of compounded Asafoetida (Bandhani Hing) and Compounded Asafoetida (Shivashan Karnag Brand) and also sized and sealed about 141 Kgs. Of the said Compounded Asafoetida (Shivashan Karnag Brand) in bags and 30 Kgs. of Compounded Asafoetida in tins in Case No. 14-D/1991 and in Case No. 13-D/1991. The said Asafoetida belonged to accused No. 1. Jagmohan Singh and accused No. 2. was looking after the day to day business of accused No. 1. as seller.

( 3 ) THE sample of Compounded Asafoetida taken by the Food Inspector from the hop of the petitioner on 16/01/1991, was found to be adulterated in each case on testing by the Public Analyst and as such the Ld. Sr. Municipal Magistrate, Calcutta took cognizance of offence of a adulteration under Section 16 (1) a (i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 read with Section 7, of the said Act against the petitioners in both the cases. The petitioners on receipt of the summons appeared before the Ld. Sr. Municipal Magistrate, Calcutta and challenged the Public Analyst's reports by exercising their rights conferred under Section 13 (2) of the Prevention of the Food Adulteration Act, 1954 and prayed for testing of another part of the sample by the Director, Central Food Laboratory and their prayer was allowed. When the certificates were received from the Director, Central Food Laboratory, they revealed that each sample taken in two different cases fully confirmed to the standard prescribed in the P. F. A. Rules and these were not adulterated. As the certificates of analysis of the Director Central Food Laboratory, superseded the Public Analyst's Reports and the Director Central Food Laboratory certified conformity of the samples to standard in each case the petitioners moved petitions for discharging them u/s. 245, Sub Clause (2) of the Cr. P. C. from the said case No. 13-D/1991 and 14-D/1991 as there was no evidence in the Court to sustain a prosecution. The prayers were refused by the Ld. Magistrate by the orders dated 21/05/1993. Against the orders of refusal the accused petitioners have come in revision for quashing the proceedings in Case No. 14-D/1991 and 13-D/1991.

( 4 ) WHILE disposing the petitions of discharge u/s. 245 Sub Clause (2) of the I. P. C. in Case No. 13-D/1991 the Ld. Magistrate discussed the matter as follows :-"there is no doubt that the report the of C. F. L. is to supersede the report of the Public Analyst as per provisions of Sub-Section (3) read with Sub-Sec. (5) of Section 13, of the P. F. A. Act. But, the decided principle reported in 1985 F. A. J. (Feb. 85) page 49, is standing otherwise. The principle decided by His Lordship in this case is standing to the effect the report of the Public Analyst will be superseded only on the point of analysis carried out by the Director, C. F. L. , but not in respect of the point of analysis those were not carried out by the Director. In this case the presence of Galbanum Resin was found in a positive test by the Public Analyst. This presence in the item in question is not permissible as per report of the Public Analyst. The report of the C. F. L. does not over the analysis on this point of presence of Galbanum Resin. "therefore, the prayer made under Sec. 245 (2) of the Cr. P. C. is standing rejected. "for similar reasons the Magistrate rejected the prayer of discharge in Case No. 14-D/1991.

( 5 ) THE Director of Central Food Laboratory, Pune tes