JUDGMENT :

Jasjit Singh Bedi, J. 

1. The present application under Section 378(3) of Cr.P.C. has been filed for grant of leave to appeal against the judgment of acquittal dated 21.08.2008 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chandigarh.

2. The instant complaint came to be instituted on 28.02.2001. The accused came to be acquitted vide judgment dated 21.08.2008. The present application for the grant of leave to appeal was filed on 24.05.2010. The matter has come up for final hearing now after 25 years of the institution of the complaint.

3. The brief facts of this case are that Sh. Sukhwinder Singh, Food Inspector on 22.12.2000 at about 7.00 a.m. intercepted a three wheeler bearing No.PB-08-X-7164 of accused Jagdish Prashad and found in his possession 20 sealed packs of Mrs. Bector's Cremica premium sandwich bread. He associated Pachnarain s/o Ram Kishore r/o House 3004, Sector-19/D, Chandigarh, as a witness to watch the proceedings initiated by him while taking a sample of Mrs. Bector's Cremica premium sandwich bread from the accused who also put his signatures on the documents prepared by him at the spot as an attesting witness.

4. The Food Inspector purchased three sealed pack of 500 gms each of Mrs. Bector's Cremica premium sandwich bread as sample from the accused against cash payment of Rs. 30/- for the purpose of analysis and examination and obtained a receipt thereof. The three packs of Mrs. Bector's Cremica premium sandwich bread were labelled and each pack was further put in plastic jar. The sample jars were properly labelled, secured, fastened and then wrapped in strong and thick papers and the ends of the wrapper were neatly folded and pasted with gum.

A paper slip bearing serial number, code number and signatures of the Local Health Authority, Chandigarh was wrapped around each sample jar from top to bottom and pasted with glue. The sample jars were further secured by means of a strong thread and sealed with four distinct seals. The signatures of the accused were obtained on each sample jar in such a manner that the paper slip and the wrapper both carried a part of the signatures. Thereafter, one sealed part of the sample was sent to the Public Analyst for analysis along with the copy of the memorandum on Form VII in a sealed packet. A copy of the memorandum and specimen impression of the seal was sent to the Public Analyst in a sealed envelope separately under intimation to the Local Health Authority. The sample was taken in the presence of witness Shri Pachnarain. The remaining two sealed samples of jars were handed over to the Local Health Authority for safe custody.

5. As per the complainant, the report of the Public Analyst, Punjab, Chandigarh was received through the Local Health Authority, U.T., admissible under Section 13 of the PFA Act which showed that the product had not been labelled in accordance with the provisions of Rule 32 of PFA Rules, 1955 as 'best before' has not been mentioned. Hence, the sample of Mrs Bector's Cremica premium sandwich bread was found to be misbranded. Since, the accused possessed misbranded Mrs. Bector's Cremica premium sandwich bread for public sale in his three wheeler, thereby he was found to have committed an offence under Section 7(ii) of the PFA Act, 1954 read with Rule 32 (i) Rules, 1955 punishable under Section 16 (1) (a) (i) of the PFA Act, 1954.

6. On finding a prima-facie case, the accused was ordered to be summoned to face trial.

7. Upon appearance, the accused was supplied with a copy of the complaint. After hearing on the point of notice of accusation, a prima-facie case under Section 7 (ii) of the PFA Act, 1954 read with Rule 32 (i) of the Rules, 1955 punishable under Section 16 (1) ta) (i) of the PFA Act, 1954 was found to have been made out against the accused and he was accordingly served with a notice of accusation to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

8. In order to prove its case, the complainant examined Shri Sukhwinder Singh, Food Inspector as PW1,