HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL APPEAL No.2045 of 2004 JUDGMENT: The lower Court acquitted the accused of the oﬀence under Section 7 (i)/ 16 (1) (a) (i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (in short, the Act) for contravention of Section 2 (ia) (m) of the Act and Rule 50 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955. The lower Court recorded acquittal on the ground that there is long delay in sending public analyst report to the accused, which resulted in preventing the accused from sending the second sample for analysis to Central Food Laboratory. The sample of groundnut oil was obtained by the Food Inspector/PW.1 from Oil Depot of the accused on 24.12.2000. The sample was sent to the public analyst for analysis on 26.12.2000. Analyst report Ex.P.11 is dated 05.12.2001. Charge sheet in this case was signed by the Food Inspector on 08.02.2002 and it was ﬁled before the Magistrate on 02.03.2002. It is only after the Food Inspector sent copy of public analyst report to the accused in compliance of Section 13(2) of the Act. By the date of service of public analyst report on the accused, shelf life of the sample product namely groundnut oil expired. The product being an edible oil cannot be expected to preserve its properties beyond six months of its extraction. Therefore, the lower Court rightly decided the case against the prosecution. There are no grounds in this appeal to interfere with order of acquittal recorded by the lower Court. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. ____________________________ SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU,J Dt. 3rd December, 2011. PNV