IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND NINE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. BHAVANI PRASAD Criminal Petition No.6034 of 2009 Between: Busa Gouri Sankar .. Petitioner AND State of Andhra Pradesh rep. by The Food Inspector, Division-III, Guntur District and another .. Respondents Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed therewith, the High Court will be pleased to quash the proceedings C.C. No.122 of 2006 on the file of the I Additional Munsif Magistrate, Narasaraopeta, Guntur District. The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the petition and the grounds filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Sri N. Lakshminarayana, Advocate for the petitioner and of the Public Prosecutor for the respondents, the Court made the following: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. BHAVANI PRASAD Criminal Petition No.6034 of 2009 ORDER: The petitioner is facing prosecution in C.C. No.122 of 2006 on the file of the I Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Narasaraopeta, Guntur District under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act in pursuance of the visit of the Food Inspector to his premises on 22-04-2003 and lifting of samples of Nagarjuna Pure and Safe Water, manufactured by Bhageeradha Purifiers, of which the petitioner is the Proprietor. The Public Analyst found the sample sent to him to be midbranded due to absence of certification of the Bureau of Indian Standards. Consequently, on obtaining written consent of the Food Health Authority on 29-03- 2006, the complaint was filed into Court. The petitioner claims that he filed W.P. No.6216 of 2002 for quashing the notification regarding ISI specifications and the notification of the Central Government was suspended by the High Court by order, dated 26-04-2002 in W.P.M.P. No.7783 of 2002, which was in force till 30-09-2004 when the writ petition was dismissed. As such, on the date of inspection by the Food Inspector, the notification requiring the petitioner to obtain certification from the Bureau of Indian Standards, was under suspension and as such, the sample cannot be treated as misbranded. He, therefore, desired that the criminal proceedings be quashed. Heard Sri N. Lakshminarayana, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri A. Ramesh, learned counsel representing the learned Public Prosecutor for the respondents. The copy of the order in W.P.M.P. No.7783 of 2002 in W.P. No.6216 of 2002, dated 26-04-2002 shows that at the instance of the petitioner, a Division Bench of this Court granted interim suspension of the notification issued by Union of India and it is not in dispute that the notification of the Central Government so suspended, is the notification requiring the petitioner to obtain certification from the Bureau of Indian Standards for the product in question. The claim that the order of suspension was in force till 30-09-2004 till dismissal of the writ petition, is also not in dispute and if so, as on the date of inspection by the Food Inspector, the petitioner cannot be said to be legally required to obtain any certification from the Bureau of Indian Standards for Nagarjuna Pure and Safe Water, manufactured by the concern owned by him. As such, the prosecution is untenable and the continuance of the same will be an abuse of process of law. Therefore, the further proceedings in C.C. No.122 of 2006 on the file of the I Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Narasaraopeta, Guntur District are quashed and the criminal petition is allowed. ____________________ G. BHAVANI PRASAD, J Date: 24-08-2009 Svv