APEAL.129-01 - 1 - VPH IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 129 OF 2001 The State of Maharashtra ...Appellant Vs. Shivaji Gunwant Bansode & Anr. ...Respondents *** Mr. A. S. Shitole, APP for the Appellant. Mr. P. R. Arjunwadkar, for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2. *** CORAM: V. M. KANADE J. DATE : SEPTEMBER 6, 2010 P.C. 1. Heard the learned APP for the appellant and the learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 1 and 2. This is an appeal filed against the judgment and order dated 28th August, 2000, of acquittal of respondents/accused Nos. 1 and 2, passed by the passed by the learned J.M.F.C. Mohol of the offences under S. 7(i) read with S. 2(ia)(a), 2(ia) (j), 2(ia)(m) read with 7(v), read with Rule 47(i) punishable under Section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 and the rules framed thereunder.. APEAL.129-01 - 2 - 3. With the assistance of the learned APP I have perused the judgment and order and the material on record. The trial Court has acquitted the accused, primarily on the ground of non-compliance of Rule 9A of the said Act and there were several irregularities and discrepancies in the evidence of the complainant and there was no corroborative evidence, adduced by the prosecution, to support complainant’s case. A public analyst was also not examined and the other witnesses have turned hostile. Admittedly, in this case the report of the public analyst was not delivered to the accused within ten days after filing of the complaint. The report of the public analyst also has not been proved. Thus, in my view, there is no infirmity in the order passed by the trial Court and as such, no interference in the impugned order is called for. The criminal appeal is therefore, dismissed. [ V. M. KANADE J.]