ORDER

This criminal original petition has been filed to quash the criminal proceedings in S.T.C.No.117 of 2021, on the file of the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Thiruppuvanam.

2.The petitioners are one and the same and he is the accused person in the case in S.T.C.No.117 of 2021, on the file of the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Thiruppuvanam. The respondent/Food Safety Officer prosecuted the petitioner for selling of unsafe Mixtures and also the same is misbranded, for the offences punishable under Sections 3(1)(ZZ), 3(1)(ZF), 52(1) and 59(1) and 52(1)

of Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006.

3.The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is running a sweet shop at Thiruppachethi in the name and style of 'Madurai Meenakshi Ennai Palakaram'. He is having valid license to run the sweet shop. On 23.02.2019, the Food Safety Officer for Manamadurai and Thirupuvanam Region, came to the petitioner's shop and ordered to provide 24 Mixture packets (each 200 grams). The petitioner provided them and then, the respondent obtained signatures in various forms and plain papers. Thereafter, the Food Safety Officer sent the Mixture samples for food analysis. The Food Analyst, Food Analysis Laboratory, Coimbatore, sent a report stating the Mixture sample is unsafe for consumption. Thereafter, the Food Safety Officer prosecuted the petitioner. The prosecution is unsustainable on the ground that the sample was taken and sent to Food Analyst on 23.02.2019, the analyst report was received by the officer on 10.08.2020 and the sanction for prosecution was accorded by the Commissioner of Food Safety, only on 24.08.2021. Thereafter, this criminal prosecution is launched. The Food Analyst failed to comply the procedures laid down under Sections 42(2) and 42(3) Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006. The analysis report had been sent after a delay of 511 days. The prosecution was initiated after one year. Hence, the prosecution is statutorily barred and pleaded to quash the criminal proceedings in S.T.C.No.117 of 2021, on the file of the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Thirupuvanam. 4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that whether the food sample became unfit for analysis at the time of analyzing done by the analyst and whether any granting of sanction to accord prosecution is defective. All these disputed questions of fact, which cannot be gone into in a quash petition. Apart from this, the petitioner had sold misbranded Mixtures. Therefore, trial has to be conducted and this petition has to be dismissed.

5.I have considered the matter in the light of the submissions made by both the parties.

6.On a perusal of records, it would reveal the fact that on

23.02.2019, at about 04.00 pm, the respondent/Food Safety Officer went to the petitioner's retail shop at Thirupachethi, inspected the petitioner's shop and found the Mixtures available for sale. Suspecting the safety of the food, in the presence of the witness, namely, P.Sundra Pandiyan, S/o Pandi, he obtained 200 grams Mixture packet (four packet) and he paid for four packets of Mixture packet(each 200 grams) and obtained a receipt for the payment. Thereafter, by following the procedures as contemplated in the Food Safety and Standards Act and Rules, the respondent forwarded the sample to the Food Analysis Laboratory, Coimbatore, on 23.02.2019. The Food Analyst, after analyzing the Mixture sample, sent the report on 06.08.2020. In the report, he concluded that the sample is unsafe under Section 3(1)(zf)(c)(i) 23(1), 26(1)(2)(i)(ii) and (v) and 27(2)(c) of Food Safety and Standards Act, 200 and stated that sample is misbranded. Since the petitioner sold unsafe and misbranded Mixture, he got the sanction from the Commissioner and prosecuted for the offence punishable under Section

59(1) and 52(1) of Food Safety Standard Act, 2006.

7.Admittedly, the sample was taken from the petitioner's shop on

23.02.2019, but the food