# magistrate/ Special Metropolitan magistrate for their expeditious disposal

- **Citation:** C.L. No. 116/Admn.(B)
- **Court:** Allahabad High Court
- **Decided:** 1979-07-16
- **Case number:** C.L. No. 116/Admn.(B)
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/magistrate-special-metropolitan-magistrate-for-their-expeditious-disposal-163517
- **Pages:** 2

## Text

313
including traffic and municipal challans be transferred to the Courts of Special Judicial
magistrate/ Special Metropolitan magistrate for their expeditious disposal.
(ix)
Food adulteration cases
C.L. No. 116/Admn.(B) dated 6th September, 1975

As regards trial of food adulteration cases, the appearance of the accused should
be secured quickly so that he may have opportunity to get a sample sent to the Central
Food Laboratory, Calcutta for examination and no dates should be fixed in such cases
without such an opportunity being given to the accused. Further, it may be so arranged
that public servant such as Food Inspector may not have to attend the court every day and
to wait unnecessarily. This can be done if the food adulteration cases are taken up by one
Magistrate and all such cases in which the same Food Inspector has to give evidence are
fixed on the same day.
C.E. No. 19/VII f-227 Admn.(F) dated 8th February, 1980

It encloses Government of India letter no. P/15025/99/79 PH (F &N) PFA dated
7.12.79 and requires all the District Judges to bring the following points to the notice of
Judicial Magistrates empowered to try cases under the Prevention of Food Adulteration
Act:-
(i)
The original memo in Form I along with specimen impression of seal is
not sent separately and sometimes is not complete in all respects.
(ii)
Seals applied on the package are not easily identifiable.
(iii)
The challan to the effect that necessary fee has been deposited, is not
enclosed.
(iv)
Sample containers are not generally affixed with court seals. Seals are
fixed on the parcel, which get damaged during transit.
(v)
Distinguishing number is not marked on the container as well as the cover.
(vi)
Samples are sent by ordinary post and not by registered post as required
under the PFA Rules.
(vii)
Samples containers/packets do not have any court seals affixed on them.
They bear only the Food Inspectors seals. Such sample containers are put
in a parcel having court seals on the outside packing only. Sometimes all
court seals on the parcel are received broken in transit and none remain
which can be compared with specimen impression of seal.
The above omission and commissions lead to avoidable delays in the submission of
reports of analysis by the central food laboratories.

The concerned courts, authorized to try food adulteration cases, may kindly be
suitably advised to comply with the procedures as laid down under Section 13 of the PFA
Act. The procedure inter alia lays down that the courts shall first ascertain that the mark
and seal or fastening is intact and the signatures are not tampered with. One of the samples
be sent to the Director, Central Food Laboratory, under the court's seal. A copy of the
memo and a specimen impression of the seal used to seal the container and the cover shall
be sent separately by registered post to Director, Central Food Laboratory. Form 1
314
prescribed for sending the sample to the Director also lays down that the treasury challan
for the fee deposited in the court should be enclosed.
C.E. No. 54/VII f-227 dated 18th August, 1981

It enclosed Letter No. P. 15025/94/80-PH (F&N) PFA of Directorate General of
Health Services dated 10.6.1981, which emphasizes that it is a statutory requirement on the
part of the court to send a copy of T.C./D.D. of Rs. 40/ towards analysis fee while
forwarding the sample for analysis to the Director of C.F.L.
C.L. No. 49/VII f-227 Admn. (G) dated 29th April, 1980

In Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 489/79 A.P. Abdulla versus Food Inspector,
Kannanore and others dated July 16, 1979, Hon'ble Supreme Court has desired that food
adulteration cases, which involve imprisonment, should be disposed of expeditiously.

The District Judges are requested to take necessary and effective steps in this
regard.
 (x)
Other cases
C.L. No. 15/Admn. (A) dated 28th January, 1977

The courts should decide the cases relating to reckless and dangerous driving as
expeditiously as possible.
C.L. No. 167/VIII h-13/Admn.(A) dated 18th November, 1977

All the Judicial Magistrates should give top urgency to the disposal of cases
under labour laws pending in their courts.
C.L. No. 185/IVg-103 dated 12th December, 1977

All the Chief Judicial Magistrates and Judicial Magistrates are directed to try
cases arising under the protection of Civil Rights Act on priority basis.

The offences punishable under section 3 to 7 of the Act may be tried by the
Magistrates by way of summary procedure in accordance with section 15 of the said Act
unless they are of pinion that the punishment under the offences is likely to be of more
than 3 months.
C.L. No. 112/IVg-103 dated 4th October, 1978

Magistrates nominated for disposal of cases under the Protection of Civil Rights
Act, 1955 should obtain a report from police in private complaints as to whether the
matter relates to harijans or not and whether it comes within the definition of
 ̳harassment' or not, so that the cases may be disposed of quickly.
C.L. No. 89/VII f-39 dated 24th July, 1979

The Chief Judicial Magistrates should specifically allot one or two courts to take
cognizance of cases under Factories Act according to the prevailing circumstances in
their districts.