Back
HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK
State Of Gujarat – Appellant
Versus
Shah Narendrabhai Manharlal – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Hemant M. Prachchhak, J.)
1. This appeal under Section 378(4) of the Criminal Procedure Code is directed against the impugned judgment and order dated 22.8.2006 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class (hereinafter be referred to as “the trial Court”), Padra in Criminal Case No. 1548 of 1991 whereby the trial Court has acquitted the respondent herein-accused for the offences punishable under Sections 2(1) (A) (M), Section 7(1)(5) and Section 16(1)(A)(I) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (hereinafter be referred to as “the Act”).
2. Brief facts of the present case, in nutshell, are as under:-
2.1 It is the case of the prosecution that the Food Inspector Shri P.R. Panchal, who was serving with office of the Assistant Commissioner, Food and Drugs Control Admn. Vadodara has visited place of respondent accused and after introducing himself as a Food Inspector, has purchased 600 Gms. sample of Turmeric Powder in the presence of panch witness at the rate of Rs.16/- per Kg., for the purpose of analysis by paying cash of Rs.9.60 ps. It is further case of prosecution that the respondent has also issued Cash Memo No. 1331 dtd. 2.1.1991 towards payment of cash o
The prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused's product was intended for human consumption, and failure to comply with mandatory procedural rules can lead to acquittal.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for scrupulous compliance with the provisions of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, in sample collection and testing....
In criminal appeals against acquittal, the burden of proof lies with the prosecution, which must establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt; failure to adhere to sampling procedures can lead to acquitta....
Acquittals in criminal cases can only be overturned if the trial court's decision is manifestly erroneous or lacks legal justification; the prosecution must prove compliance with statutory requiremen....
An acquittal will not be disturbed unless compelling errors are evident; the presumption of innocence heavily favors the accused in such cases.
The court reaffirmed that non-compliance with statutory provisions under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act can lead to acquittal, emphasizing the accused's rights to challenge the prosecution's....
In acquittal appeals, the presumption of innocence remains until proven otherwise, and intervention is only warranted when the lower court's decision is perverse or illegal.
Appellate courts hold full power to review acquittal evidence; however, they must respect trial court findings that are reasonable, reinforcing the presumption of innocence.
In acquittal appeals, a Court cannot disturb findings if multiple reasonable conclusions arise, reinforcing the presumption of innocence for the accused.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
