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

1992 Supreme(Guj) 49

J.N.BHATT
PRITHVIRAJ DAHYABHAI – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: M.G.NAGARKAR, R.N.SHAH, S.N.SHELAT, S.P.DAVE

BHATT, J.

( 1 ) THE petitioner who is an original accused has challenged the conviction order passed against him under Sec. 16 (l) (a) (i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (act for short hereinafter) and the sentence of simple imprisonment of three months and fine of Rs. 500. 00 or in default further simple imprisonment for 30 days passed by the learned Metropolitan magistrate, Ahmedabad in Summary Criminal Case, No. 92 of 1980. and confirmed by the City Sessions Judge, at Ahmedabad in Criminal Appeal No. 74 of 1982.

( 2 ) THE resume of the material and relevant facts leading to the rise of the present Revision may, shortly, be stated at this stage.

( 3 ) THE present petitioner who is original accused was running a shop in Raikhad locality, at Ahmedabad, and was, also, dealing with groundnut oil. The petitioner was doing business in the name of kailas Kirana Store. The Food Inspector of Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation, opponent No. 2, original complainant, inspected the Kirana shop of the petitioner, on 18-9-1986, at about 9-45 a. m. The petitioner was doing business at the time of inspection made by the Food Inspector.

( 4 ) THE Food Inspector opponent No. 2, origin















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