Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 570 (GAU)

Anil Agarwalla v. State of Assam

2013-08-14

INDIRA SHAH

body2013
ORDER : By filing this application under section 482, Cr. P.C. the petitioner has sought for quashing the proceeding of C.R. case No. 91 of 2011 under Sections 2 & 7 read with Section 16 of Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 pending in the Court of Smt. K.R. Deka, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Sivasagar. 2. Heard Md. Aslam, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. H. Sarma, learned Addl. P.P. Assam. 3. The facts in brief may be narrated as under : On 29-10-2010 the Food Inspector along with other visited the petitioners firm M/s. Tirupati Water Industries in Dorikapar Industrial Estate, Sivasagar, District : Sivasagar, Assam for inspection of Packaged Drinking Water (Dew Drops Brand). After inspection he collected three samples of packaged drinking water under sealed jars containing 20 litres each, as per the procedure laid down in Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and Rules. One of the samples was sent to public Analyst through messenger and the public analyst reported that the sample of packaged drinking water is found to be contaminated with Caliform Bacteria and hence adulterated according to PFA Rules. The Joint Director of Health Services, Jorhat gave necessary sanction for prosecution against the petitioners. The complaint was filed before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sivasagar on 16-7-2011. On 20-7-2011 the Local Health Authority sent a notice to the petitioners notifying that they can get the sample analysed from the Central Food Laboratory. On 4-8-2011, the petitioners filed a petition before the Chief Judicial Magistrate requesting him to send a sample to Central Food Laboratory and the said prayer was allowed. As per the order of the Court the petitioners deposited requisite fee for sending the sample. As per the order dated 5-1-2012 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate it appears that sample could not be sent through Registered Post as it was above 20 kg. Thereafter several days were fixed for necessary order and on 12-12-2012 a petition was moved before the trial Court on behalf of the petitioners that in absence of report from Central Food Laboratory the trial should not continue. Moreover the expiry period of mineral water is 1 month from the date of manufacturing and it was already over. The matter was posted for necessary order. On the date so fixed, the learned trial Court issued non-bailable warrant of arrest against the petitioners as they were found absent. 4. Moreover the expiry period of mineral water is 1 month from the date of manufacturing and it was already over. The matter was posted for necessary order. On the date so fixed, the learned trial Court issued non-bailable warrant of arrest against the petitioners as they were found absent. 4. Apparently the mandate of sub-section (2) of Section 13 of PFA Act had not been complied with. It is now well settled that Section 13 of PFA Act is mandatory (reference may be made to case of State of Orissa v. Gauranga Sahu, 2003 Cri. LJ 3077 : ( AIR 2004 SC 1233 ). The prayer of the petitioners to send the sample to the Central Food Laboratory could not be considered. The petitioners have lost their valuable rights to get the sample analysed by Central Food Laboratory. There cannot be further any direction to send the sample to Central Food Laboratory as the samples had been taken long back on 29-10-2010 and no preservative was added to it, as it is apparent from the public analysis report as well as the Memorandum. The expiry date of the samples was 1 month from the date of manufacture. 5. Considering all aspects of the proceeding of C.R. Case No. 91 of 2011 under Sections 2 & 7 of PFA Act, pending before the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Sivasagar is hereby quashed and set aside. 6. Return back LCR along with a copy of this judgment. Petition allowed.