STATE OF GUJARAT v. JAYNTILAL RANJITLAL JAIN
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Judgment
CORAM : MR.JUSTICE M.S.PARIKH Date of decision: 28/06/96 ORAL JUDGEMENT (cid:9)Heard Mr.D.N.Patel, learned A.P.P. for the State and Mr.Yatin Soni, learned Advocate appears for the accused - respondent at the admission stage.
2.(cid:9)The State has preferred this Appeal against the Judgment and order of acquittal dated 26.7.1994 rendered by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Godhara in Criminal Case No.3695 of 1988 filed under Section 7(1)(3) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954.
3.(cid:9)The learned Magistrate has, upon appreciation of evidence, reached the conclusion that there is no case for conviction against the respondent - accused. He has inter alia noted that the sample was retained for a long period of seven months in ordinary room and yet the notice under Section 13(1) of the Act was given for the sake of giving such notice. Reference in this connection has ben made by the learned Magistrate to the decision of the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of Municipal Corporation, Delhi V/s. Ghasiram, reported in A.I.R. 1976 SC ______. There are other grounds for recording the acquittal set out by the learned Magistrate.
#4. I have gone through the Judgment and order rendered by the ld. Magistrate. I am of the opinion that this petition cannot be entertained. Hence rejected. * * * * *
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India; Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 — s. 7(1)(3).
Which court decided this case, and when?
Gujarat High Court, on 28 Jun 1996. The bench was M S PARIKH.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.