N Criminal Appeal No 114 of 1979 From the Judgment and order dated the 28th March 1978 of the Delhi High Court in Criminal Misc
No 39978
Randhir Jain Appellant
The order of the Court was delivered by CHANDRACHUD CJ
As long back as on August 11975 a Food Inspector purchased a sample of suji Semolina from the respondent accused which was found to contain excessive moisture and ash
The learned Metropolitan Magistrate Delhi acquitted the accused by his judgment dated July 19 1977 on the ground that the Food Inspector did not send the required quantity of the adulterated article to the Public Analyst for analysis
The Rules required the i the Food Inspector to send 250 gms
Of suji for analysis whereas he sent only 200 gms
The High Court of Delhi dismissed the revision application filed by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi summarily
The learned Metropolitan Magistrate is clearly wrong in the view taken by him from which it must follow that the High Court was not justified in dismissing the revision application summarily
The fact that a lesser quantity than that prescribed by the Rules is sent for analysis cannot constitute an impediment in the conviction of a person accused of selling adulterated food so long as the quantity sent for analysis is sufficient to enable the Analyst to make a satisfactory analysis according to accepted tests
We do not how ever propose to interfere with the order of acquittal since this appeal was filed not so much for the purpose of securing the conviction of the accused but for the purpose of obtaining a decision from this Court on the question whether a conviction could be recorded under section 7 read with section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act even if a quantity smaller than that required by the Rules to be sent for analysis is sent for the purpose of analysis to the Public Analyst
That question was decided long 286 back in State of Kerala vs Alaserry Mohammedl Therefore though the view taken by the courts below is unsupportable we do not propose to interfere with the ultimate order passed by them
The appeal is accordingly dismissed


Summary:
Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules requires the Food Inspector to send 250 gms of suji semolina for analysis
On August 1 1975 a Food Inspector purchased a sample of 200 gms of suji from the respondent accused and sent the same to the Public Analyst for analysis
Though the report indicated that the sample was found to contain excessive moisture and ash the Metro politan Magistrate Delhi acquitted the accused by his judgment dated July 19 1977 on the ground that the Food Inspector did not send the required quantity of the adulterated article for analysis
The High Court of Delhi dismissed the revision application filed by the Municipal Corporation
Hence the appeal by special leave
Dismissing the appeal the Court  HELD The fact that a lesser quantity than that prescribed by the Rules is sent for analysis cannot constitute an impediment in the conviction of a person accused of selling adulterated food so long as the quantity sent for analysis is sufficient to enable the Analyst to make a satisfactory analysis according to accepted tests
Therefore a conviction could be recorded under section 7 read with section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act
285F G State of Kerala V Alaserry Mohammed followed