JUDGMENT B.N. Katju, J. - This is an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 2. The applicant is being prosecuted under section 7/16 of the Food Adulteration Act as he was found selling and having in possession for sale Sabut Haldi which was adulterated as it was coloured with lead chromate. The complaint filed against the applicant indicates that a sample of only 300 grams of Sabut Haldi was purchased by the Food Inspector from the applicant. It appears from the application and the affidavit filed in support it that only 101) grams of Haldi was sent to the Public Analyst for analysis and this has not been controverted in the counter affidavit filed by the Food Inspector. Under Rule 22 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules the quantity of Haldi required to be sent to the Public Analyst for analysis approximately 150 grams. As only 100 grams of Haldi was sent to the Public Analyst there was a clear violation of the aforesaid rule. It has been held in R.G. Pamnani v. State of Maharashtra reported in 1975 (1) FAC 1 that- "The Public Analyst did not have the quantities mentioned in the rules for analysis. The appellant rightly contends that non-compliance with the quantity to be supplied caused not only infraction of the provisions but also injustice. The quantities mentioned are required for correct analysis. Shortage in quantity for analysis is not permitted by the Statute." Thus even if the facts stated in the complaint be accepted it is clear that the applicant cannot be held guilty under section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act in view of the non-compliance of rule 22 of the Food Adulteration Rules by the Food Inspector. 3. This application is accordingly allowed and the proceedings against the applicant in Criminal Case No. 321 of 1974 pending in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, (Railways) Bareilly are quashed.