Court No. - 78
Case :- GOVERNMENT APPEAL No. - 2288 of 1986 Appellant :- State of U.P. Respondent :- Kunj Behari Counsel for Appellant :- A.G.A.
Counsel for Respondent :- Avdhesh Narayan Tiwari,R.S. Yadav,U.K. Saxena
Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.
Heard Sri Hari Pratap Gupta, learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the State and perused the record This Government Appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 24.2.1986 passed in Criminal Appeal No 66 of 1984 (Kunj Bihari Vs. State of U.P. ). By the impugned order the first appellate court reversed the order dated 15.11.1984 passed by the then Magistrate First Class, Jalaun at Orai under section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act in which the respondent was sentenced.
The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 30.8.1981 at about 9.00 A.M., the milk samples were taken from the accused- respondent when he was carrying milk for sale. The milk samples were sent for chemical analysis and the Public Analyst, Lucknow opined that the samples contained a shortage of 33% of fat and 26% of no-fat solids in the milk and had viewed that the milk was adulterated and accordingly a complaint was filed in the concerned court after obtaining necessary sanction for prosecution and after taking the evidence, the trial court of Magistrate, convicted the accused-respondent Kunj Behari.
Aggrieved by the order of the trial court, an appeal was filed by the accused-respondent Kunj Behari and in appeal the order of the trial court was set aside and against that appellate order, the present Government Appeal has been filed by the State.
Learned counsel for the appellant State has submitted that the findings of the appellate court are not based on the evidence of the case and the view taken by the appellate court in the impugned order is against the provision of law and weight of evidence and the view taken by the appellate court in the impugned order is against the settled principle of law and the appellate court has totally discarded the evidence available on record and illegally acquitted the accused-respondent in appeal.
I have gone through the impugned order and perused the lower court record. The lower court record was not in readable condition as it was destroyed by the insects. After perusal of the entire material available on record and considering that the appellate court had allowed the appeal after giving sound reasoning and has opined that no proper notice of the Public Analyst's report was given to the accused-respondent and no proper service was served on the accused and held that no notice under section 13 (2) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act was served on the accused-respondent which was mandatory provision which had not been followed and in the impugned order the the appellate court has also opined that rule 21 of the Rules framed under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, was not followed.
This Court considers that the impugned order is perfect and valid and was based on merits as per the provisions of law and no interference is required in the impugned order.
After perusal of the entire evidence and hearing the argument of the learned A.G.A., I am of the opinion that this Government Appeal is having no merits and is liable to be dismissed and is, accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 7.10.2021 AU