ORDER : SANDEEP MEHTA, J. By way of this petition under Section 482 CrPC, the petitioner Kishan Gopal has approached this court for assailing the proceedings of the FIR No. 102/2016 registered at Police Station Sumerpur, District Pali for the offences under Sections 420, 272, 273, 486 and 487 of the IPC on the ground that the entire proceedings are highly delayed and thereby the right of the petitioner to challenge the Public Analyst's report has been defeated. 2. Facts in brief are that tins of refined cotton seed and soyabeen oil were seized under Section 102 CrPC from the petitioner's premises by the officials of Police Station Sumerpur on 05.01.2010 under the suspicion that the same were misbranded and adulterated. The requisite sampling procedure was carried out and the samples of oil so seized were sent to the Public Health Laboratory, Jodhpur, from where a report dated 11.03.2010 was issued to the effect that the samples of refined cotton seed and soyabeen oil were adulterated as they did not conform to the prescribed standards. Further opinion of the Public Health Authority was sought, from where a letter dated 14.03.2011 was received opining that the oil was genuine and fit for human purposes and that the same was not dangerous to human life. Surprisingly enough, the officials at Police Station Sumerpur kept on sitting tight and did not take any prompt action pursuant to receiving the reports issued by the Public Health Authority. The impugned FIR came to be registered as late as on 08.03.2016 solely on the basis of the Public Health Laboratory's report dated 11.03.2010 3. During investigation, the Investigating Officer could not collect any evidence so as to show that the petitioner cheated anybody by selling substandard oil by portraying the same to be upto the mark. Otherwise also in view of the Public Analyst's report that the oil samples were genuine, but did not meet the requisite standards, the offence under Section 420 IPC is ex facie not made out. Otherwise also in view of the Public Analyst's report that the oil samples were genuine, but did not meet the requisite standards, the offence under Section 420 IPC is ex facie not made out. The remaining offences carry the following sentences :- Section 272 IPC: 6 months’ imprisonment Section 273 IPC: 6 months’ imprisonment Section 486 IPC: 1 year's imprisonment Section 487 IPC: 3 years' imprisonment It is debatable as to whether the offences under Sections 486 and 487 IPC would be made out against the petitioner because no other person has claimed ownership of the trademarks/labels affixed on the tins of oil recovered form the petitioner's premises, but even if it is presumed for a moment that these offences are substantiated, the limitation for launching prosecution for such offences would be 3 years as per Section 468 of the CrPC. Manifestly the FIR came to be lodged well after the expiry of the said limitation period. No satisfactory explanation is available on the case diary and in the reply submitted by learned Public Prosecutor for this gross and unreasonable delay occasioned in initiating the prosecution against the petitioner. The delay in initiating the proceedings and the interference by police in an affair which should have been exclusively handled by the Food Inspector concerned has totally deprived the petitioner of his statutory right to challenge the Public Analyst's report by taking recourse to the procedure provided under Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954. 4. In this background, this court is of the firm opinion that allowing continuance of the investigation and further proceedings of the impugned FIR against the petitioner amounts to a gross abuse of process of law. Accordingly, the instant miscellaneous petition deserves to be and is hereby allowed. The FIR No. 102/2016 registered at Police Station Sumerpur, District Pali and all further proceedings sought to be taken thereunder against the petitioner are hereby quashed.