SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1976 Supreme(Cal) 246

A.N.BANERJEE
BHOLA NATH NAYEK – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


JUDGEMENT

1. This Rule is for setting aside an order dated 3-12-1975 passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Hooghly and also for quashing of the proceeding pending before him. It appears that on 25-6-1974 a Food Inspector and Sanitary Inspector of Arambag Public Health Circle, District Hooghly, took from the premises, allegedly belonging to the petitioner, at Dihalpara a sample of wheat Atta for the purported analysis under the provision of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954. The Public Analyst analysed the sample sent to him on September 5, 1974 and made a report to the Food Inspector that the sample was adulterated. The copy of that report was received immediately thereafter by the Food Inspector, Arambag but no copy of it was given to the petitioner till November 10, 1975. It further appears that on the receipt of the said report of the Public Analyst the District Health Officer, Hooghly filed a complaint dated 26-12-1974 before the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Arambag. On the basis of it the learned Magistrate took cognizance of the offence under Section 16(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act on 3-1-1975 and issued summons upon t
















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top