: 1 : IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 833 OF 2004 --------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, office : Memoranda of Coram, : appearances, Court’s : Court’s or Judge’s Orders orders or directions : & Registrar’s orders : --------------------------------------------------------- Shri D.R.More, APP for the State. CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: R.S.Mohite, J. R.S.Mohite, J. R.S.Mohite, J. DATE : 13th January, 2006. DATE : 13th January, 2006. DATE : 13th January, 2006. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. This is an appeal filed by the State impugning the judgment and order passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Roha on 31.03.2004 acquitting the accused for the offences punishable under sections 7(I) read with Section 2(ia)(a) and section 2(ia) (m) of Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 punishable under section 16 of the said Act. On perusal of the impugned judgment and order, it is seen that the same has : 2 : been passed on cogent and acceptable reasons. The Court has observed that though the sample was taken on 15.05.99 and the Public Analyst report was received on 7/8/99, the complaint was filed on 27/04/2000 after the delay of 11 months and 12 days which deprived the accused of his right of further examination of the sample by the Central Food Laboratory and thus, there is violation of section 13(2) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. Examination at the Central Food Laboratory was done on 16/07/2001, i.e. after more than two years after taking the sample. View taken is supported by several authorities as cited in the judgment. 2. Hence, the view taken is a possible view. In the circumstances, leave is refused and consequently, the appeal stands dismissed. (R.S.Mohite, J.) (R.S.Mohite, J.) (R.S.Mohite, J.)