Amar Nath Jain vs Ganga Ram Shakya and Another

Krishna Kumar, J.—This revision has been filed against the judgment and order dated 19.2.1987, passed by the Sessions Judge, Etawah whereby the appeal was allowed and the case was remanded to the trial court with a direction that the sample kept with the local health authority should be sent to the Central Food Laboratory for analysis. The learned Sessions Judge had clearly upheld that it was the mistake on the part of the learned Magistrate when the right was denied to the accused for getting the alleged adulterated article saunf to be re-tested by the Central Food Laboratory.

It is contended by the learned Counsel for the revisionist that the sample was taken on 25.7.1983, and the case was decided by the appellate authority on 19.2.1987, and during this period of about three and a half years the sample would not have remained as such, as it was at the time when the sample was taken. Further, it may be noted that 13 years have already passed since this revision is pending in this Court and even if this revision is dismissed, no purpose would be served because in that case, the sample was again required to be sent to Central Food Laboratory for testing and after about 17 years, it is just impossible that the sample may be fit for testing. Under such circumstances the purpose of remand of the case has become frustrated and when the appeal was allowed by the learned appellate court, the only course left open is to acquit the accused of the charges levelled against him.

In view of what has been indicated above, the revision is allowed. The order dated 19.2.1987, passed by the appellate court is modified to the extent that the revisionist is acquitted of the charge levelled against him. The revisionist is on bail. His bail bond is cancelled and sureties are discharged.