K.P.MOHAPATRA
BIJAYA KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent
K. P. MOHAPATRA, J.
( 1 ) THE petitioner has challenged his conviction and sentence under S. 16 (1) (a) (i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' ).
( 2 ) THE petitioner was a dealer of grocery articles of Dharamsala Market of Keonjhar town. On 23-1-1980 at 12-30 P. M. the Food Inspector (P. W. 2) inspected the grocery shop and suspected that turmeric whole kept inside the shop was moth-eaten and unfit for human consumption. Accordingly, he purchased 600 grams of turmeric whole and after compliance with the rules, the samples were kept in clean and dry bottles in equal parts and subsequently one of them was sent to the Public Analyst for opinion. The Public Analyst reported in his report (Ext. 4) to the effect that the sample of turmeric whole was damaged by insects and was adulterated in view of the provision of S. 2 (ia) (m) of the Act. After receipt of the report, it was found that there was a prima facie case of food adulteration against the petitioner and after obtaining the sanction for prosecution Ext. 5 from the Authorised Officer, the Chief District Medical Officer, prosecution report was submitted in court.
( 3 ) THE petitioner
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.