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

1957 Supreme(Mad) 114

SOMASUNDARAM
Public Prosecutor – Appellant
Versus
Ponnappan – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Public Prosecutor, for Appellant; N.S. Raghavan, for Respondent.

Judgement

JUDGMENT :-This is an appeal by the State against the acquittal of the respondent herein for an offence under the Food Adulteration Act, Central Act 37 of 1954. The prosecution was launched by the Health Officer, Erode Municipality, for the respondent being in possession of adulterated milk for the purpose of sale. The purchase of the milk for the purpose of test was on 22nd December 1955. The Act under which the respondent was prosecuted came into force on 1st June 1955. Under S. 20 of the Act there shall be no prosecution for an offence under this Act except by or with the written consent of the State Government or a local authority or a person authorised in this behalf by the State Government or a local authority. The local authority is defined under S. 2, cl. (viii) as meaning a municipality, the municipal board or municipal corporation, the local area, as found in sub-cl. (1) (a) of cl. (viii) of S. 2. The Health Officer in this case was no doubt authorised by G. O. No. 542, P. H., dated 14th February 1956. The prosecution in this case was before the authorisation by the Government. Previous to this there was another Government Order, G. O. No. 1635, P. H., of 1941, u

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