IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr. Misc. No.37361 of 2007 JAY PRAKASH TEKRIWAL @ JAY PRAKASH, S/O SRI CHHEDILAL TEKRIWAL .. Petitioner Versus 1. STATE OF BIHAR 2. SRI SUDAMA CHOUDHARY, FOOD INSPECTOR, BHAGALPUR .. Opposite Parties **** For the petitioner .. Md. Aslam Ansari, Adv. For the State .. Mr. P.K. Jha, A.P.P. For O.P. No. 2 .. Mr. Pranav Kumar, Adv. **** /5/ 05.02.2010 Heard the parties. 2. The petitioner is the retailer and has a shop in the style of M/S Monu Stores, Anand Bhawan, Budanath Road, Bhagalpur, wherein he stocks articles of general use. He Seeks quashing of the entire proceeding, including the order, dated 21.03.2007, taken in Bhagalpur P.S. Case No. 83 of 2007, by which the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhagalpur, has taken cognizance for offences under Section 16(1)(a) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954. 3. The prosecution case is that on 29.11.2006 the Food Inspector collected Nestle Bar One Chocolate and Munch Chocolate from the shop of the petitioner and sent it to the public analyst, the report of which was that the article had been misbranded since the logo of it being vegetarian was not fixed on the proper site of the label. The simple submission of 2 the petitioner that there is no doubt that the petitioner is a licensed shop keeper and was stocking articles produced by the Nestle India Limited as a distributor from the year 2006 in pursuance to an agreement between the two and the articles sold by him were stocked by him after the same was manufactured legally by Nestle India Limited and there is no contribution of the petitioner in misbranding the article. The further argument is that under Section 16(1)(a) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, the definition of misbranding does not stretch to “logo for vegetarian not fixed at proper site of the label” and since the admitted position is that the logo was no doubt there and, therefore, it can not be termed as being misbranded. 4. I find substance in the argument and for the reason that just because the logo is not fixed on the proper site it would not be a case of misbranding, I allow this application and quash the entire proceeding of Bhagalpur P.S. Case No. 83 of 2007, including the order, dated 21.03.2007, passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhagalpur. S.A. (Anjana Prakash, J.)