AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
N. Ananda
The Food Inspector of Chikkanayakanahalli seized the packed food from the bakery of first accused in Chikkanayakanahalli and sent it for analysis. After analysis, it was found that the food was not only unfit for human consumption but also contained cockroach excreta. Therefore, the Officer authorised in terms of the notification dated 4.9.2003, initiated complaint u/s 200 Cr.P.C. The learned trial Judge, took cognizance and issued summons to the accused. Therefore the accused is before this Court.
The learned Counsel appearing for petitioner submits that tot accused is not a licensed food vendor. Therefore, second accused cannot be held responsible for the food articles, seized from the bakery of first accused. The learned Counsel would further submit that the Food Inspector, who seized the food article is not the Authorised Officer.
The learned Government Pleader has produced the notification, issued by the District Health Officer pursuant to the notification issued by the Director of Health and Family Planning vide Order No. G.A.T.C.(2)54/07-08 dated 30.7.2007. In the complaint, it is stated that the complainant has been authorised to initiate the complaint in terms of the Notification No. NFW 255 CGE 2003 dated 4.9.2003. Therefore, at this stage, this submission cannot be accepted.
The Food Inspector has seized the food product manufactured and sealed by M/s.Haldirams Foods International Limited. It was being sold by first accused. After analysis, it was found that the food article was not only unfit for human consumption but also contained cockroach excreta. Therefore, it is not possible to hold that allegations made against petitioner do not constitute any offence and the petitioner cannot be prosecuted for an offence u/s 7 of the Food Adulteration Act.
In the result, the petition is dismissed.