M/S Jay Shree Tea & Industries Ltd. ... vs State Of West Bengal & Anr
2022 Latest Caselaw 598 Cal

16.02. 2022 item No.39 n.b.

ct. no. 34

(via video conference) CRR 746 of 2020

M/s Jay Shree Tea & Industries Ltd. & Anr.

Vs.

State of West Bengal & Anr.

Ms. Sutapa Sanyal, Mr. Debrup Bhattacharjee, Mr. Pradeep Kumar Tulsyan .....for the Petitioners

Supplementary affidavit filed today be kept with the

record.

Ms. Sanyal, learned advocate appearing for the petitioners

submits that there was observation made by the learned Appellate

Court while passing its Judgment dated August 1, 2018 in Criminal

Appeal No. 37 of 2014.

Learned advocate for the petitioner draws the attention of

the Court to inner page 4 of the Judgment of the Appellate Court

and submits that in respect of petitioner no.1 namely, M/s Jay

Shree Tea and Industries Ltd. reference has been made by the

learned Appellate Court as manufacturer which is in-correct. To

that effect learned advocate draws the attention of the Court to the

evidence of the Food Safety Inspector Officer of KMC Mr. Pradip

Kumar Chakraborty whose deposition referred to Jay Shree Tea

Industries as packager, as petitioner no.1 was involved in

packaging the packets.

It has been submitted by the learned advocate appearing

for the petitioner no.1, petitioner was never the manufacturer but

was packager and the observation made by the learned Appellate

Court is against the evidence available on records.

I find that there is sufficient force in the submission made

by the learned advocate for the petitioner as the observation in the

Appellate Court judgment at page 4 regarding petitioner no.1. is

contrary to the evidence of PW 2 which has referred the petitioner

no.1 as the packager and not as a manufacturer. Accordingly in

the Judgment and order dated 1.8.2018 the word "Manufacturer"

used in the last paragraph at inner page 4 should be read as

"Packager".

The prayer in the revisional application was restricted to

such corrections as the same was refused by the learned Appellate

Court. I am of the opinion that in view of Section 362 of the Code

of Criminal Procedure the learned Appellate Court was entitled to

make such alterations which do not touch the core of the finding of

the Judgment arrived at by the Appellate Court.

Accordingly, CRR 746 of 2020 is disposed of.

All pending connected applications, if any, are

consequently disposed of.

All parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly

downloaded from the official website of this Court.

( Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)