Short Note Heard Shri Desai, learned PP for the applicant-State and Shri Harish Kumar, LC for the respondent-accused. The State is aggrieved by the order of discharge passed by CJM, Indore in Criminal Case No. 11543/99, discharging accused-respondents of the charge u/s 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954. Admittedly, the article in question was a water pouch, a sample of which was taken by the Food Inspector for the purpose of analysis. The Learned Magistrate has held and in my opinion rightly, that the seized article did not fall within the definition of 'food' as defined under section 2(v) of the Act. Definition of 'food' given in the said clause expressly excludes water from within the ambit of 'food'. This Court in Udhavdas 1999(1) MPJR 46 ] has held that even ice is not 'food' within the meaning of the Act. It was nobody's case that the water in question was being sold as mineral water. Even the Public Analyst examined in evidence clearly admitted that the sample of water sent for analysis to him did not constitute article of food within the meaning of the Act. The Court below, in my opinion, was right in not' taking cognizance of the offence against the accused-respondents. No interference is called for by this Court in revision. The revision is accordingly dismissed.