Ramjilal Agarwal vs State of Jharkhand

Rakesh Ranjan Prasad, J.—Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that sample of iodized salt was collected by Food Inspector which was sent before the Public Analyst. On being analyzed, the said salt was found to be adulterated but the report of the Public Analyst was never given to this petitioner, though in terms of the provision as contained in sub-section II of Section 13 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 the report should have been served to the petitioner so that the petitioner may move the application before the court concerned for getting the sample tested from the Central Food Laboratory. Since, the mandatory provision has not been complied with, prosecution of the petitioner would be bad. In view of the submission, let notice be issued to the opposite party No. 2 on filing requisites etc. under, registered post with acknowledgment due by Friday.

Till then, no coercive step shall be taken against the petitioner Ramjilal Agarwal in connection with C2-107 of 2011.