Skip to content


The State Vs. Shanti Prakash - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtPunjab and Haryana High Court
Decided On
Case NumberCriminal Appeal No. 552 of 1955
Judge
Reported inAIR1957P& H56; 1957CriLJ390
ActsPunjab Pure Food Act, 1929 - Sections 4 and 13
AppellantThe State
RespondentShanti Prakash
Appellant Advocate Har Parshad, Asst. Adv. General
Respondent AdvocateSurender Singh
Cases ReferredState v. Shanti Par
Excerpt:
.....further appeal shall lie. even otherwise, the word judgment as defined under section 2(9) means a statement given by a judge on the grounds of a decree or order. thus the contention that against an order passed by a single judge in an appeal filed under section 104 c.p.c., a further appeal lies to a division bench cannot be accepted. the newly incorporated section 100a in clear and specific terms prohibits further appeal against the decree and judgment or order of a single judge to a division bench notwithstanding anything contained in the letters patent. the letters patent which provides for further appeal to a division bench remains intact, but the right to prefer a further appeal is taken away even in respect of the matters arising under the special enactments or other instruments..........two cases by a learned magistrate of amritsan both cases are under section 13(1)(a) of the punjab pure food act and in both cases the learned magistrate has acquitted the accused persons because no standard had been prescribed for the examination of haldi (turmeric) which was the substance alleged to have been adulterated.2. in the appeal -- 'state v. shanti par-kash', criminal appeal no. 552 of 1955, the report of the analyst is only this much-'it is highly adulterated with extraneous vegetable matter.'this report, in my opinion is insufficient because it does not show what is the extent of adulteration and what is the sample sent to the analyst adulterated with. on this cvicence i do not think it to be safe to convict the accused and i would therefore dismiss the appeal as against.....
Judgment:

Kapur J.

1. This judgment will dispose of the two appeals (Criminal Appeals Nos. 552 and 553 of 1955) which have been filed by the State against an order of acquittal passed in these two cases by a learned Magistrate of Amritsan Both cases are under Section 13(1)(a) of the Punjab Pure Food Act and in both cases the learned Magistrate has acquitted the accused persons because no standard had been prescribed for the examination of haldi (turmeric) which was the substance alleged to have been adulterated.

2. In the appeal -- 'State v. Shanti Par-kash', Criminal Appeal No. 552 of 1955, the report of the Analyst is only this much-

'It is highly adulterated with extraneous vegetable matter.'

This report, in my opinion is insufficient because it does not show what is the extent of adulteration and what Is the sample sent to the Analyst adulterated with. On this cvicence I do not think it to be safe to convict the accused and I would therefore dismiss the appeal as against Shanti Parkash.

3. As to the Criminal Appeal No. 553 of 1955, State V. Hukam Chand, the Analyst's report is that the sample sent to him contained ash 31.45 per cent, and that it was highly adulterated with Inorganic and vegetable matter. This report certainly shows that the sample must be taken to be adulterated with extraneous matters. Ash cannot by any stretch of imagination be called food and ordinarily if ash is mixed with any substance it must fall within the meaning of the word 'adulteration'. . Section 4 which defines adulteration' provides-

'4. For the purposes of this Act any food shall be deemed to be adulterated-

(i) if it contains or is mixed or diluted with any substance which diminishes in any matter its nutritive or other beneficial properties as compared with such food in a pure and normal state or which in any other manner operates or may operate to the preiudice or disadvantage of the purchaser or consumer;

(ii) .....

(iii) if it contains or is mixed or diluted with any substance of lower commercial value than such food in a pure and normal state;

(iv) .....'

The sample produced is mixed with a substance and it must operate to the disadvantage of the purchaser or consumer and would also diminish the nutritive or beneficial properties of turmeric in its pure and normal state. Besides its being mixed with ash. it must have a lower commercial value than turmeric in a pure and normal state.

4. The learned Magistrate has acquitted the accused on the ground that in the rules it is not specified as to how turmeric Is to be analysed find merely becsuse there are twelve different kinds of turmeric does not mean that they cannot be adulterated For conviction under this Act it is not necessary that there should be any specific rules for analysis of the food. All that it requires is that there should be diminution of nutritive or beneficial properties of food, or there must be mixture with a substance of Lower Commercial value than such food in a pure and normal stato. It is clear that the sample taken would both under parts (i) and (iii) of Section 4 of the Punjab Pure Pood Act of 1929.

5. In my opinion the accused was wrongly ac-quitted and I would therefore allow this appeal, set aside the order of the learned Magistrate and convict the accused and sentence him to a fine of Rs. 150/- or in default one month's rigorous imprisonment.

6. In all these cases where pure food is analysed the Analyst should indicate what is the extent of Impurity and what the impurity is Merely stating that it is highly adulterated with extraneous vegetable matter is not sufficient for the purpose of determining the question of guilt or otherwise of the accused person. I direct thata copy of this judgment be sent to the Government to be communicated to the Analyst.

Falshaw, J.

7. I agree.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //