JUDGMENT 1. - This misc. petition has been filed under Section 482, Cr.P.C. for quashing of the complaint filed under Section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (for short "the P.F.A. Act"). The trial Court had ordered to summon the present petitioner. 2. The only contention of the present petitioner is that according to the prosecution, samples of mustard oil have been taken on 9.1.2010 and it is not in dispute that the sample packets were packed in July, 2009 and the samples had to be expired in July, 2010 and complaint for the alleged offence has been filed in the trial Court on 25.11.2010 and admittedly, the samples have been expired in July, 2010 and as such the valuable right of the petitioner provided under Section 13(2) of the P.F.A. Act to get the samples analysed from the Central Food Laboratory had been lost as the complaint has been filed in November, 2010. By that time, the samples had expired. He has placed reliance on Girishbhai Dahyabhai Shah v. C.C. Jani & Anr., (2010) 2 SCC (Cri.) 270 . 3. Section 13 of the P.F.A: Act reads as under : "13. Report of Public Analyst.-(1) The Public Analyst shall deliver, in such form as may be prescribed, a report to the Local (Health) Authority of the result of the analysis of any article of food submitted to him for analysis. (2) On receipt of the report of the result of the analysis *rifer sub-section (1) to the effect that the article of food is adulterated, the Local (Health) Authority shall, after the institution of prosecution against the person from whom the sample of the article of food was taken and the person, if any whose name, address and other particulars have been disclosed under Section 14-A, forward, in such manner as may be prescribed, a copy of the report of the result of the analysis to such person or persons, as the case may be, informing such person or persons that if it is so desired, either or both of them may make an application to the Court within a period of ten days from the date of receipt of the copy of the report to get the sample of the article of food kept by the Local (Health) Authority analysed by the Central Food Laboratory." 4. A bare perusal of above goes to show that after receipt of the report of the Public Analyst under Section 13(1), the prosecution could be launched and the copy of the report should be supplied to the accused. Sub-Section (2) provided that on receipt of the report, the accused could make an application to the Court to get the sample of articles to be analysed by the Central Food Laboratory. In the present case, samples have already been expired in July, 2010, whereas the complaint has been filed in November, 2010 and the right which was provided by Section 13(2) of the P.F.A. Act has been taken away by the present petitioner. Hence looking at the above legal position, continuance of proceedings would be an abuse of process and hence liable to be quashed. 5. Therefore, this misc. petition is allowed and complaint Case No. 317/2010 is hereby quashed qua the petitioner and consequential proceedings pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Makrana are hereby quashed qua the petitioner.Petition allowed. *******