Back
N. S. SHEKHAWAT
State (Food Inspector U. T. Chandigarh) – Appellant
Versus
Titu – Respondent
JUDGMENT
N.S. Shekhawat, J.
Assailing the impugned judgment dated 07.03.2007 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chandigarh, whereby the respondents were ordered to be acquitted of the charge under section 16 (1) (a) (i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter to be referred as 'the Act'), the Union Territory of Chandigarh has preferred the present appeal before this Court.
2. As per the complaint instituted by the appellant/State; at about 3.30 p.m., on 21.02.1986, Balbir Singh, Food Inspector inspected the premises of accused Dharam Pal and found the accused Titu having in his possession about 5 kgs of tonned milk for sale in his sweat shop, namely, M/s Paul Sweets, stored in a 'Patila' (steal pan). A notice was served by Food Inspector in writing in form VI and demanded a sample of tonned milk and purchased 660 mls of milk for analysis after mixing against cash payment of Rs. 2.50/-. Milk was divided into three equal parts and was put into three dry and clean bottles. 18 drops of formaline were added as preservative in each bottle. The bottles were labelled, stoppered, secured, fastened and then wrapped in strong and thick papers and the ends of
Point of Law : Delay on both counts is not attributable to the appellants and, therefore, the consequences thereof cannot work adversely to the interest of the appellant.
The failure to comply with mandatory sampling procedures under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act raises reasonable doubt and undermines the prosecution's case.
The Food Inspector failed to establish the necessary jurisdictional facts for sampling, resulting in the acquittal of the accused due to reasonable doubt.
The delay in filing the complaint and the delay in sending the second sample to the Central Food Laboratory were fatal to the case of the prosecution, leading to the acquittal of the accused.
The court established that non-compliance with the procedural requirements of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act invalidates a conviction, emphasizing the importance of independent witness testi....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that statutory provisions must be strictly interpreted, and non-compliance with procedural requirements may not necessarily invalidate the prosecut....
The court confirmed the conviction based on compliance with food safety regulations, determining specific procedural requirements were mandatory, while others were directory, influencing the admissib....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
