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

1980 Supreme(HP) 43

T.R.HANDA
GANDHARV LAL – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF H. P. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Harinder Singh Giani, Raj Kumar Garg and Mrs. Pratima Malhotra, for Petitioner M.L. Chauhan, Asstt. to Advocate General, for the State.

ORDER

1. By this petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, hereinafter shortly stated the Code, the petitioner prays for quashing his prosecution under Section 16 (1) (a) read with Section 7 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, hereinafter referred to as the Act, as ordered by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class Ghumarwin vide his order dated 21-9-1979 whereby the Judicial Magistrate discharged Shri Bal Kishan (vendor) against whom the original complaint under Section 16 (1) (a) of the Act had been filed by the Food Inspector and on an application made by the said Shri Bal Kishan, directed prosecution of the present petitioner for the offence aforesaid.

2. It appears that on 28-11-1978 the Food Inspector, Bilaspur purchased a sample of Meethi Golian from Shri Bal Kishan of village Dakari, Tehsil Ghumarwin, for the purpose of analysis under the Act. The said sample, according to the allegations made in the complaint lodged by the Food Inspector against the said Shri Bal Kishan, was taken and dealt with in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the Rules made thereunder and on being analysed by the Public Analyst it was found adulterated. The









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