After obtaining the sanction for prosecution from the Chairman of the Municipality, the appellant was prosecuted before, the Magistrate, 1st Class, Midnapore.
An appeal to the Sessions Judge was without success.
This sanction did number show a that tile Chairman had applied his mind before giving the sanction b that it was valid as it was number granted by the Local Authority, namely, the Municipality and c that since the resolution of the Municipality had authorised the Chairman to give the sanction, the new Chairman cannot avail himself of that authorisation as by that time there were fresh elections and a new Chairman was elected.
235 of 1966.
Appeal from the judgment and order dated December 24, 1968 of the Calcutta High Court in Criminal Revisions No.
On being questioned by the Food Inspector the appellant informed him that the oil which he was carrying was manufactured at Sree Krishna Oil Mills, Midnapore.
The offence in respect of which the appellant was charged was that he being the Manager of the Oil Mills for manufacturing mustard oil was responsible for the adulteration.
He pleaded number guilty but on the evidence and the report of the Public Analyst he was companyvicted and sentenced as aforesaid.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No.
Nur ur din Ahmed, S. C. Agarwal and Indiraj Jaisingh, for the appellant.
On July 10, 1964, at about II A.M. the appellant was going in a truck carrying 100 tins of mustard oil and was stopped by the Food Inspector, Kharagpore Municipality.
He sent one sample to the Public Analyst one he kept with himself and the third he gave to the appellant.
50 of 1969.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Jaganmohan Reddy, J. This appeal is by certificate under Art.
134 1 c of the Constitution.
The appellant is the Manager of Sree Krishna Oil Mills, Midnapore, the proprietor of which was one Srilal Bajoria.
The proprietor Srilal Bajoria was acquitted but the appellant was sentenced to one year rigorous imprisonment.
Thereafter the appellant filed a revision before the High Court and that was also dismissed.
P. Mitra and G. S. Chatterjee for Sukumar Basu for the respondent.
Both these persons were tried jointly for an offence under S. 7 1 /16 1 a i of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 hereinafter referred to as the Act.
The Public Analyst on examining the sample sent to him reported on August 5, 1964, that saponification value of the oil was 181.6, Iodine value 107.2 and B. R. reading at 40C was 60.1 and was of the opinion that the sample of mustard oil was adulterated vide Ext.
