((-1-)) mst IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.752 OF 1996 The State of Maharashtra Appellant versus Velji R. Puriya & others Respondents Ms.A.T.Javeri, APP for the appellant-State. K.H.Parekh for respondents 1 to 4. CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 30th March 2009 JUDGEMENT : 1. Heard learned APP for the appellant. The respondents were charged with violation of provisions of section 7(i) read with section 2(ia)(a) read with section 2(ia)(c) read with section 2(ia)(f) read with section 7(v) punishable under sections 16 and 17 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as "the said Act"). The order of acquittal has been passed mainly on the ground that the appellant failed to comply with the mandatory requirement of sending an intimation as required by sub clause (i) of clause (c) of sub section 1 of section 11 of the said Act to the Local Health ((-2-)) Authority. 2. After hearing learned APP for the appellant I find that there is no evidence on record to show that the requirement of sending an intimation to the Local Health Authority was complied with by the prosecution. In fact, the prosecution witnesses admitted of having failed to comply with the said requirement. This Court has consistently held that the requirement of sending intimation under the aforesaid provisions to the Local Health Authority is mandatory. 3. Therefore, the order of acquittal passed by the learned Trial Judge on the ground of non compliance with the mandatory provisions of law cannot be faulted with. The appeal is dismissed. (A.S.OKA, J.) ((-3-)) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.752 OF 1996 The State of Maharashtra Appellant versus Velji R. Puriya & others Respondents Ms.A.T.Javeri, APP for the appellant-State. K.H.Parekh for respondents 1 to 4. CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 30th March 2009 JUDGEMENT : For the reasons separately recorded, the appeal is dismissed. (A.S.OKA, J.)