1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4639/2010 KIRAN MOHANLAL RANKA AND ANR ...PETITIONERS V/S THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS ...RESPONDENTS ... Mr. R.R.Mantri, Adv., for the petitioners. Mr. K.M.Suryawanshi, A.P.P. for State. ... CORAM: K.U.CHANDIWAL, J. DATE:7/1/2011 *** PER COURT : 1. Heard. The accused/applicant, a dealer, under a valid license in bakery products, also carries vending of milk powder. In the exercise of business, allegedly sold the same to Suprabhat Dairy. It is explicit, the accused being dealer - vendor of the milk powder, is not expected to know the user thereof or its end use. If the dairy has misused the same for adulteration of the milk, primarily, no responsibility can be cast on the accused/applicant. The prosecution against the accused/applicant, for an offense under Sections 114, 272 of IPC or Section 3 and 7 2 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act or Rules thereunder, is basically uncalled for. The applicant could be a witness for the prosecution in Crime No.53/2010. 2. Considering the above aspects of the matter, the prosecution should not be further allowed to proceed against the accused/applicant. It is quashed and set aside to the extent as above. 3. Mr.Mantri, learned Counsel, submits that this is a fit case wherein the accused/applicant would be claiming compensation against the State authorities. It is for the accused/applicant to independently seek his remedies in proper forum. Application allowed. Proceedings to the extent of applicants quashed. (K.U.CHANDIWAL) JUDGE ... agp/4369-10crapl