IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 13TH OCTOBER 2011 / 21ST ASWINA 1933 Crl.MC.No. 1135 of 2011() ------------------------------------ ST.932/2007 of JUDL.FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT IL, PERUMBAVOOR .................... PETITIONER(S): 2ND ACCUSED: --------------------------------------------- P.M.SHIHAB, AGED 46 YEARS, S/O.MUHAMMED, PUTHENPURA HOUSE, CHERUVELIKKUNNU, MUDICKAL P.O., PERUMBAVOOR, PIN-683 542. BY ADV. SRI.M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM SRI.M.G.ANON RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT & STATE: ---------------------------------------------------------------- 1. FOOD INSPECTOR, PERUMBAVOOR MUNICIPALITY PERUMBAVOOR, PIN-683 542. 2. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN-682 011. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.P.M.SANEER THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: tss CRMC NO.1135/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES A1:- CERTIFIED COPY OF THE COMPLAINANT SUBMITTED BY THE IST RESPONDENT IN ST.932/2007 OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, PERUMBAVOOR. DTD. 30.3.2007. A2:- COPY OF THE MAHZAR DTD. PREPARED BY THE IST RESPONDENT.DTD. 28.10.2003. A3:- COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE PUBLIC ANALYST.24.11.2003 A4:- COPY OF THE INTIMATION UNDER S.13(2) OF THE PFA ACT ADDRESSED TO THE IST ACCUSED.DTD. 4.4.2007. A5:- COPY OF THE INTIMATION UNDER S.13(2) OF THE PFA ACT ADDRESSED TO THE PETITIONER /2ND ACCUSED. DTD. 4.4.2007. RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES NIL:- TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE tss N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, J. ---------------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.1135 of 2011 ---------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 13th day of October, 2011 Order The petitioner is the second accused in ST No.932/2007 on the file of the JFCM Court, Perumbavoor. The complaint was filed by the Food Inspector alleging offences punishable under Section 16(1A) r/w Sections 7(i), 7(vi) and Section 2(ia) (a) and 2 (ia) (f) of the PFA Act read with Rule 5, Appendix B, item No.A-25-03 of PFA Rules, 1955. The sample was taken on 28.10.2003. But the complaint was filed only on 2.4.2007. Intimation under Section 13(2) was received by the petitioner only on 4.4.2007. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the expiry date of the food article is September, 2004 as can be seen from the 2nd page of Annexure A2 mahazar. Therefore, the learned counsel submits that no purpose will be served by sending the food article to the Central Food Laboratory in the year 2007. It is inconceivable why the Food Inspector did not file complaint immediately after getting the report of the Public Analyst and why the District Food Inspector also did not peruse Crl.M.C.1135/2011 2 the report of the Public Analyst (Annexure A3). The Local Health Authority also did not take action in the matter immediately. Hence the petitioner is justified in his submission that he is denied the right given under the PFA Act to get the sample sent for examination to the CFL. In the light of what is stated above, the prosecution initiated against the petitioner in ST No.932 of 2007 is only to be quashed. In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed. The entire proceedings in ST No.932 of 2007 on the file of the JFCM Court, Perumbavoor is quashed. N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. srd Crl.M.C.1135/2011 3