Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CR.A/2251/2009 4/ 4 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL
APPEAL No. 2251 of 2009
=========================================
D
B MODI, FOOD INSPECTOR, - Appellant(s)
Versus
KULDEVI
KIRANA STORE'S OWNER DINESHBHAI RAMJIBHAI BHANUSALI & 1 -
Opponent(s)
=========================================
Appearance :
MR
YV SHAH for the Appellant.
Mr. H.L.Jani, Additional PUBLIC
PROSECUTOR for the respondent no.
2.
=========================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE Z.K.SAIYED
Date
: 28/01/2010
ORAL
ORDER
The
original complainant -Food Inspector of Billimora Nagar Palika, has
filed this Appeal under Section 378(4) of Cr.P.C. against the
Judgment and order of acquittal dated 31.1.2007 passed by learned
J.M.F.C., Gandevi, in Criminal Case No. 3641 of 2003, whereby the
respondent no.1 accused has been acquitted from the charges
levelled against him under sections 2, 7 and 16 of the Prevention of
Food Adulteration Act, 1954.
The
brief facts of the prosecution case is that on 18.6.2003 the
complainant Food Inspector had visited the place of respondent no.1
accused and purchased 450 gms. of cotton seed oil for the purpose
of analysis. After following due procedure, the sample was sent to
the Public Analyst. As per the report of the Public Analyst, the
said sample was ‘adulterated and, therefore, after obtaining
necessary sanction, filed complaint in the Court of learned
J.M.F.C., Gandevi.
Thereafter,
the trial was initiated against the respondent no.1 accused in
the Court of learned Magistrate, Gandevi. To prove the case against
the respondent no.1 accused, the complainant has examined the
witnesses and also produced documentary evidence. And at the end of
trial, after recording the statement of accused under Section 313
Cr.P.C. and after hearing the parties the learned Magistrate has
acquitted the respondent no.1 accused from the charges levelled
against him, vide judgment under challenge.
Being
aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said Judgment and order
passed by the learned Magistrate, the appellant original
complainant has filed present Appeal.
Learned
Advocate Mr. Y.V.Shah appearing on behalf of the appellant, has
contended that the Judgment and order of trial Court is against the
provisions of law. The trial Court has not properly appreciated the
facts and evidence led by the complainant and looking to the
provisions of law itself it is clearly established that the
appellant has proved the whole ingredients of offence against the
respondent no.1-accused. Learned Advocate for the appellant has
also taken this Court through the oral as well as documentary
evidence.
I
have perused the oral as well as documentary evidence. I have also
considered the submissions made by the learned Advocate for the
appellant. From the perusal of the judgment of the trial Court it is
established that while taking the sample the Food Inspector has not
properly followed the procedure as required under Section 14 of the
Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. From the perusal of evidence
on record as well as from the provisions of law, it is clearly
established that the complainant has failed to prove the alleged
offence against the respondent no.1-accused. Today also, the learned
advocate for the appellant has tried to establish his case, but he
is not in a position to convince this Court that the complainant has
followed mandatory provisions of the Act. In view of the fact that
the complainant has not followed mandatory provisions of the Act,
the complainant cannot say that he has proved his case beyond
reasonable doubt.
Thus,
in my opinion, looking to the evidence on record, from the evidence
itself it is it clearly established that the complainant has not
proved its case beyond reasonable doubt.
In
this regard, it is required to be noted that the principles which
would govern and regulate the hearing of appeal by this Court
against an order of acquittal passed by the trial Court have been
very succinctly explained by the Hon’ble Supreme Court as well as
this Court in a catena of decisions. Thus, the powers which this
Court may exercise against an order of acquittal are well settled.
Thus, in case the appellate Court agrees with the reasons and the
findings given by the lower Court, then the discussion of evidence
is not necessary.
I
have gone through the Judgment and order passed by the trial Court
and have also perused the oral as well as documentary evidence
produced before me and also considered the submissions made by the
learned Advocate for the appellant. On going through the Judgment
and order passed by the trial Court and the papers placed before me,
I am of the opinion that the trial Court has not committed any error
in not believing the case of the complainant. I find that the
findings recorded by the trial Court are absolutely just and proper
and in recording the said findings no illegality or infirmity has
been committed by it. The learned Judge has rightly come to the
conclusion that the complainant has miserably failed to prove the
case against the respondent no.1 accused.
I
am, therefore, in complete agreement with the findings, ultimate
conclusion and the resultant order of acquittal recorded by the
Court below and hence find no reason to interfere with the same.
Hence, the Appeal is hereby dismissed at the admission stage.
In
view of above the Appeal is dismissed. The Judgment and order dated
31.1.2007 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class,
Gandevi in Criminal Case No.3641 of 2003 is hereby confirmed. Bail
bond, if any, shall stands cancelled.
(Z.K.SAIYED,
J.)
***darji
Top