PADMANABHAN
FOOD INSPECTOR – Appellant
Versus
SATHISH KUMAR – Respondent
1. The appellant (Food Inspector. Palghat Municipality) prosecuted respondents 1 and 2 in S. T. Case No. !09 of 1980 before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Palghat, for an offence punishable under S.16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 for the alleged contravention of S.7(1) thereof. The sample involved is arrow root powder. Sale to the Food 1nspector was on 16-10-1980 at 10 a.m. by the 2nd respondent who was the Salesman-cum-Cashier. The purchase was from Deepa Medicals, Palghat owned by the first respondent. After duly sampling, one sample was sent to the Public Analyst and Ext P18 report was obtained which showed that what was sold as arrow root powder consisted wholly of corn-starch and as such adulterated because under clause (a) of sub-section (ia) of S.2 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act an article is adulterated if what is sold by the vendor is not of the nature, substance or quality demanded by the purchaser and is to his prejudice or is not of the nature, substance or quality which it purports or is represented to be. The Magistrate acquitted both the respondents on the sole ground that they have established the defence under S.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.