THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N. RAVI SHANKAR CRIMINAL PETITION No.5359 OF 2008 ORDER: Heard Sri P. Prabhakar Reddy, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri A.S. Vasudevan, learned counsel representing the Additional Public Prosecutor. 2. The petitioner herein is the second accused in C.C.No.75 of 2008 on the file of the Court of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Peddapally, Karimnagar District. The said case has been registered for offences under Section 7 read with Section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 under the relevant sub-sections thereof. A perusal of the complaint filed by the second respondent-Food Inspector would show that the first accused in the said case being the proprietor of a provisions store i.e., Kirana Shop, kept for sale on 24.03.2007 a Mirchi powder called ‘Kalanjali Mirch Powder’. The version of the Food Inspector is that, he found the said Mirchi Powder to be adulterated and he accordingly after following the procedure, filed the complaint which has been registered as the present C.C.No75 of 2008. 3. The averments in the complaint would disclose that on 24.03.2007, on an enquiry made by the Food Inspector, A-1 told him that he purchased the Mirchi Powder in question from a wholesale dealer without disclosing the name of the wholesale dealer or producing the bill or voucher under which he purchased it. It is seen that, subsequently the Food Inspector went by the address of the manufacturer/marketer of the said Mirchi Powder found on the label of it and then proceeded to launch prosecution against the petitioner herein also on the plea that petitioner is the manufacturer of the said Mirchi Powder. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner says that there is nothing in the complaint or no document has been filed by the complainant to show that he is in any way connected to the Mirchi Powder in question and therefore, the case against him should be quashed. A perusal of the complaint would show that it does not speak of any material which discloses that the petitioner herein is in any way connected with the Mirchi Powder in question. What all that can be found from the complaint is that, the Food Inspector himself going by the address given on the label proceeded to launch the prosecution against this petitioner also. The complaint also does not show that the first accused produced any bill to show that or disclosed the name of this petitioner as the person who sold the said Mirchi Powder to him. In other words, it can be said that complaint against this petitioner has been filed on the basis of label contents without any further material/evidence. It should be noted that a label can be mischievously got printed by anybody showing the name of another person as manufacturer in order to escape from liability. Thus it the duty of Food Inspector to find out by an enquiry or otherwise by gathering connecting evidence that the person whose name is found on label is the manufacturer to link him with the product and show that the contents of label are true. It is for this reason a mere label cannot be made ground for prosecution. 5. In similar circumstances, this Court in T. Srihari Ltd. And others Vs. State of A.P[1], held that the prosecution launched against a person merely on the ground that his name is found as manufacturer or marketer on the label of the product without other evidence to show any connection between him and the product in question, cannot be allowed to be continued and that it has to be quashed. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor could not bring to my notice any circumstances in the matter which can be relied upon to reject the request of the petitioner ignoring the above decision. 6. Accordingly, for the aforesaid reasons, this criminal petition is allowed. It is however made clear that if the evidence let-in in the case against the first accused warrants that proceedings should be initiated against the petitioner also or any other person, it shall be open for the learned Magistrate to act in accordance with Section 20A of the Act, which is akin to Section 319 Cr.P.C. 7. This petition is accordingly allowed in the above terms. ___________________________ (Justice N. Ravi Shankar) 9th November, 2011 sp THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N. RAVI SHANKAR CRIMINAL PETITION No.5359 OF 2008 9th November, 2011 sp [1] 2006 FAJ 247