IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.22131 of 2009 ARBIND GAMI @ ARBIND KUMAR GAMI Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 02 29.03.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The petitioner questions his prosecution and cognizance dated 24.3.2009 in T.R. No. 2236 of 2009 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madhubani under Section 16(a) (i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. The defence is that he is a petty shopkeeper and not the manufacturer. The allegations are for sale of adulterated Khajur Vanaspati, a food item. The manufacturer has also been made an accused. The grounds urged on behalf of the petitioner in the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., are basically in the nature of his defence to be considered during trial as the allegations prima facie make out a case for trial. There is no merit in this application, it is accordingly dismissed. P.K. (Navin Sinha, J.)