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

1985 Supreme(Guj) 42

J.P.DESAI
MANSINGH CHHAJURAM YADAV – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: D.F.Amin, S.R.DIVETIA

J. P. DESAI, J.

( 1 ) PETITIONER No. 1 (original accused No. 1) Mansingh Chhajuram Yadav owns a shop at Nadiad. He is dealing in milk curd etc. Petitioner No. 2 (original accused No. 2) Kundankumar Chiranjilal Yadav was serving with petitioner No. 1. On 28-9-1978 at about 4-45 P. M. Jagdishchandra Barot Food Inspector of Nadiad Municipality went to the said shop. Accused No. 2 was present at the shop at that time. The Food Inspector purchased about 600 grams of curd from accused No. 2 and collected the same in a vessel and divided the same in three parts and sealed the three parts as per the procedure laid down in the Act as well as in the rules. Accused No. 1 was not present at the shop at the time the sample was taken. One of the three samples was sent to the Public Analyst who on analysis found that it was adulterated in that it contained excess water by 13% and that way did not conform to the standards required by the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act 1954 (herein after to be referred to as the Act) as also the provisions of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules 1955 (hereinafter to be referred to as the Rules ). On receipt of this report of the Public Analyst complaint wa











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