State Of Maharashtra vs Shri Ashok Bhagchand Motwani & ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 6700 Bom

                                        1                                       apeal704.02




                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
                  

                           NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.


 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 704 OF 2002


 State of Maharashtra, 
 through the Food Inspector Shri R.B. Rithe,
 Food and Drug Administration, M.S. Akola.                      ....       APPELLANT


                     VERSUS


 1) Ashok Bhagchand Motwani,
     Aged about 45 years, 
     Vendor of M/s Shree Ganesh Industries
     Phase II, Plot No.F-45, M.I.D.C., Akola.

 2) Murlidhar Motiram Panjwani,
     Proprietor, Aged 50 years, 
     M/s. Shree Ganesh Industries, Phase-II,
     Plot No.F-45, M.I.D.C., Akola.                             ....       RESPONDENTS


 ______________________________________________________________

           Smt. M.H. Deshmukh, Addl.P.P. for the appellant, 
                      None for the respondents.
  ______________________________________________________________

                              CORAM :  ROHIT B. DEO, J.

                            DATED    :    1
                                               SEPTEMBER, 2017
                                            st



 ORAL JUDGMENT : 

The appellant/State seeks to assail the judgment and

order of conviction delivered by 6th Judicial Magistrate First Class,

Akola in Regular Criminal Case 921/1994 by and under which the

2 apeal704.02

respondents/accused are acquitted of offence punishable under Section

16(1)(a)(1) read with Section 7(i) of the Prevention of Food

Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act' for short).

2. The learned Magistrate has recorded a finding of fact that

the prosecution has not shown that prior to sending the second part of

the sample of the haldi powder, the local health authority has formed

an opinion that the report of the Public Analyzer, Pune was erroneous.

According to the learned Magistrate, this was in contravention of the

provisions of Section 13(2-E) of the Act.

3. The learned Magistrate has further recorded a findings

that Rules 17 and 18 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rule,

1955 have been contravened inasmuch as the second sample of haldi

powder, memorandum and specimen impression of seal were sent in a

single packet vide Exhibit 77. Moreover, a perusal of paragraphs 12,

13 and 14 of the judgment impugned would reveal that a finding is

recorded that the food sample of haldi powder confirms with the

standards laid down in Item A-05-20-01 of Appendix-B to the Rules.

The reasons given by the learned Magistrate to come to the conclusion

that the sample of haldi powder was not adulterated, are certainly not

3 apeal704.02

perverse.

4. I am not inclined to interfere with the judgment of

acquittal. The appeal is without substance and is rejected.

JUDGE

adgokar