1.00. Present Criminal Revision Application has been preferred by the petitioner herein – original complainant – State of Gujarat to quash and set aside the impugned order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate (First Class), Umargam below Ex.6 dtd.20/2/2004 passed in Criminal Case No. 974 of 2001 by which the learned Magistrate has discharged the respondents herein – original accused for the offences punishable under Sections 2(1a)a, 2(9)k, 7(1)(2), and (5) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and also under Rules 62 and 32 of the Rules. 2.00. It appears that the criminal complaint came to be filed against the respondents herein – original accused in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate (First Class), Umargam for the offences punishable under Sections 2(1a)a, 2(9)k, 7(1)(2), and (5) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and also under Rules 62 and 32 of the Rules, alleging inter-alia that “Gutkha” purchased from the accused was misbranded and/or adulterated. In the said complaint respondents herein – original accused submitted application Ex.6 for discharge which came to be allowed by the learned Judicial Magistrate (First Class) discharging the respondents herein – original accused, against which the petitioner - State has preferred the present Criminal Revision Application.
3.00. Having heard Ms.Chetna Shah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr.C.P. Champaneri, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents – original accused, it appears that the controversy involved in the present revision application is squarely covered by the decisions of this Court and similar question came to be considered by the learned Single Judges of this Court in Criminal Revision Application Nos.400, 402 as well as 436 of 2004 and considering the fact that “Gutkha” does not fall within the provisions of Food Adulteration Act and no standard has been prescribed with respect to “Gutkha” in the Food Adulteration Act and considering the fact that “Gutkha” is not included as Food Article, the learned Single Judges of this Court have dismissed the similar applications preferred by the very petitioner - State confirming the similar order passed by the Judicial Magistrate (First Class) discharging the accused.
4.00. In view of the above and for the reasons stated in Criminal Revision Application Nos.400, 402 as well as 436 of 2004, present Criminal Revision Application also deserves to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed. Rule is discharged.
[M.R. SHAH, J.] rafik