( 1 ) THIS is an appeal under Section 417 (3) Criminal Procedure Code by the Nagar Mahapalika kanpur, against the order dated 22-7-1961 of the IVth Additional Sessions Judge, Kanpur, allowing the appeal of Sri Ram, respondent, and acquitting him of the offence punishable under section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (to be referred hereinafter as the Act) for contravention of Section 7 thereof.

( 2 ) THE facts, in brief, are that on 29-1-1960 the respondent, Sri Ram, was found selling laddoos in Mohalla Ashok Nagar of Kanpur City. The Food Inspector purchased laddoos and prepared three sealed samples thereof, one of which was sent to the Public Analyst for analysis and report, the other was handed over to the respondent and the third was retained in the office of the medical Officer of Health, Kanpur. The Public Analyst submitted his report (Ex. Ka-4) and expressed the opinion that the sample was coloured with a coal-tar dye, namely, metanil yellow, which was not one of the coal-tar dyes permitted for use in foodstuffs under Rule 28 of the prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1951 (to be referred hereinafter as the Rules ). The report of the Public Analyst shall be quoted in full at a later stage while considering whether such a report is admissible in evidence.

( 3 ) ON receipt of the Public Analysts report the Medical Officer of Health submitted the complaint (Ex. Ka-5) to the Magistrate Ist Class, Kanpur, on the basis of which the respondent was tried and convicted of the above offence. As the respondent had previously been convicted for a similar offence, he was awarded the sentence of one years R. I. and a fine of Rs. 2000/-, in case of default, another three months R. I.

( 4 ) SRI Ram preferred an appeal before the Sessions Judge of Kanpur which has been allowed on two legal grounds: firstly, that in view of Section 20 of the Act, the magistrate could not take cognizance of the complaint, having not been made by a proper authority; and secondly, that the report of the Public Analyst was defective and was not admissible in evidence. The learned sessions Judge was of opinion that on the day the complaint was submitted to the magistrate there was no Municipal Board of Kanpur and there, could be no Medical Officer of Health of a nonexistent body like the Municipal Board of Kanpur. Reliance was placed upon the form of the complaint without reading it as a whole. With regard to the Public Analysts report the learned sessions Judge was of opinion that it was necessary for the Public Analyst to indicate in the report the tests applied by him for detecting metanil yellow coal-tar dye in the sample and as the report did not contain all the material data it was not a document which could be read in evidence under Section 13 of the Act.

( 5 ) IT may at the very outset be observed that the Nagar Mahapalika of Kanpur was created with effect from February 1, 1960 and since that date the Municipal Board of Kanpur ceased to exist. The Medical Officer of Health of the Municipal Board, however, became the Medical Officer of health of the Nagar Mahapalika; and in view of the provisions of the U. P. Nagar Mahapalika adhiniyam, 1959, notifications issued with regard to the powers of the employees of the municipal Board of Kanpur became applicable to the corresponding employees of the Nagar mahapalika. The State Government had issued a notification authorising the Medical Officer of health of the Municipal Board of Kanpur to make complaint with regard to offences committed under the Act and by virtue of the provisions of the U. P. Nagar Mahapalika Adhiniyam, 1959, the Medical Officer of Health, who automatically became the Medical Officer of Health of the nagar Mahapalika, could make such complaints which could be taken cognizance of by magistrates. In other words, the Medical Officer of Health of the Nagar Mahapalika of Kanpur was a person duly authorised by the State Government to make complaints as contemplated by