Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.73 seconds)
Documents citing V. Jayavelu And Anr. vs Food Inspector, Corporation Of Madras on 29 October, 1969

Enayat Ali Nazar Ali Bhori vs The State Of Maharashtra on 16 December, 1975

In Jayavelu's case, a learned single Judge of that Court has taken the view that it is not always necessary that immediately after the prosecution is instituted, the accused should take stops for sending the sample to the Director of the Central Food Laboratory and it is left to the accused to wait till the examination of the public analyst in Court and if the evidence of the public analyst is not unfavourable to him, he may even decide not to exercise the right conferred on him. It was further held that no time limit can be prescribed for the accused to exercise his right save that he should exercise such a right before the close of the trial.
Bombay High Court Cites 24 - Cited by 9 - Full Document

State By Public Prosecutor vs Chinnamuthu Naidu on 22 December, 1972

2. It is contended that under Section 13 (2) the accused can request the Court for sending either the sample bottle given to the accused or the sample bottle retained by the Food Inspector and that as the sample bottle retained by the Food Inspector is really not available, the accused should produce the sample bottle given to him, if he wants the Court to have the sample analysed by the Central Food Laborartory. It is also contended by the learned Public Prosecutor that in the face of Ex. P-3, the acknowledgment signed by the accused for having received not only the price of the burfi but also one sample bottle he cannot be heard to say that no sample bottle was given to him at the time of sampling. It appears to me that the version of the accused before the learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate that no sample bottle had been given to him at the time of the sampling cannot be accepted. But at the same time, the question is whether the order of discharge can be interfered with. As pointed out by Krishna-swamy Reddy J. in Jayavelu v. Food Inspector, Corporation of Madras, 1969 Mad LW Cri 259 at 261 : (1971 Cri LJ 122), the accused has got a discretion to ask the Court to send either that part of the sample given to him or -the part retained by the Food Inspector and it is the duty of the Court to comply with the request of the accused. When the section itself gives a discretion to the accused regarding which sample has to be sent to the Central Food Laboratory for analysis, it cannot be said that the accused should retain the sample bottle given to him and if he does not retain the same for being sent to the Central Food Laboratory, he loses the right conferred on him by Section 13 (2). Even though, in this case, one part of the sample ought to have been given to the accused, it is quite possible that the accused might have mislaid it. Even otherwise, that is, even if the accused is deliberately withholding the sample bottle given to him, he cannot be denied the right conferred on him under Section 13 (2) referred to above. It cannot be said that as he is not producing the sample bottle given to him, he cannot have the other sample tested by the Central Food Laboratory. Therefore, as the third sample is not available for being sent to the Central Food Laboratory for analysis, it must be held that the accused had been denied a valuable right. Under such circumstances, he cannot be successfully prosecuted for having sold adulterated food stuff. The ordei of discharge is correct. The revision petition has got to be dismissed. But before parting with the case, I have to point out that this revision petition ought to have been filed before the Sessions Judge of Ma-durai, for the Sessions Judge has jurisdiction to entertain and dispose of a revision petition against the discharge under Section 253 (1), Criminal Procedure Code. Any way the revision petition having been entertained here, I am disposing it of on merits. For the reasons stated earlier, the revision petition is dismissed.
Madras High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1