1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order of the trial Magistrate issuing summons to the Public Analyst at the fag end of the trial. He is directed to appear with documents for showing the date of analysis of the sample. This petition under S.482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short the Code') is to quash the aforesaid order.

2. The petitioner is facing a charge for an offence under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954. After the close of the evidence of the prosecution, and after questioning the accused under S.313 of the Code the trial Magistrate posed the case for judgment. But instead of pronouncing judgment on that day the learned Magistrate passed an order for issuing summons to the Public Analyst. The Magistrate has stated in his order that on going through the report of the Public Analyst it appeared to him that for a just decision of the case the Public Analyst should be summoned as a court witness for ascertaining the date of analysis.

3. The petitioner challenges the order on the main ground that the attempt is to fill up a lacuna in the prosecution evidence, The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that even if the material sought to