HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL PETITION No.5050 OF 2010 Dated : 10.08.2010 Between : M/s.Hindustan Lever Ltd. … Petitioners-A.3 & A.4 A n d The State of A.P. … Respondents HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL PETITION No.5050 OF 2010 ORDER: This Criminal Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is filed by the petitioners-A.3 & A.4 seeking to quash the further proceedings in C.C.No.663 of 2009 on the file of the II Additional Munsif Magistrate- cum-Judicial First Class Magistrate, Nellore, for the offence under Sections 7 (i) 2 (ia) (k) (j) and punishable under Section 16 (1-A) (i) of Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, (for short ‘the Act’). The case of the Prosecution is that on 15.12.2006 at about 9.30 a.m. the Food Inspector, complainant herein, went to M/s.Padmavathi Fancies situated at D.No.5-765, Stonehousepet, Nellore, for inspection and found A.1 transacting the business. Further, the complainant on suspicion of adulteration, drawn the samples of ‘kisan’ mixed fruit jam before two independent mediators as per the procedure prescribed under the Act and obtained acknowledgement from A.1 under Section 14A of the Act. On sample was send for analysis to the public analyst, who after examination of the sample opined that ‘the sample does not confirm to the standards of Sulphurdoxide and total dye content and is therefore adulterated’. Further, after obtaining written sanction from the Director, State Food (Health) Authority, Hyderabad, prosecution was launched against A.1 to A.4. Heard. The learned counsel for the petitioners contended that A.1 is the retail vendor of the said product having purchased the same from A.2, who is the purchaser of said product from the manufacturers-A.3 and A.4. He also submitted that A.2 has not produced any receipt or invoice to show that the product was purchased from the petitioners herein. Learned counsel further submitted that when there is no evidence to show that the product was purchased from the petitioners, there cannot be any prosecution against them. In support of his contention he relied on the judgment of this Court dated 16.06.2010 rendered in Crl.P.No.1081 of 2004. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor also fairly concedes the same and also submits that the proceedings against the petitioners can be continued again if any evidence is elicited against them during trial. Hence, the proceedings against the petitioners A.3 and A.4 in C.C.No.663 of 2009 on the file of the II Additional Munsif Magistrate- cum-Judicial First Class Magistrate, Nellore, are hereby quashed. However, if any evidence brought to light against the present petitioners during the trial, the learned Magistrate is at liberty to proceed against the present petitioners also. Subject to above observation, the Criminal Petition is allowed. ________________________ JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO Dated : 10.08.2010 sur