http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2  

CASE NO.: Appeal (civil)  1235 of 1999

PETITIONER: STATE OF HARYANA

RESPONDENT: SATISH KUMAR

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 23/02/2005

BENCH: B.P. SINGH & ARUN KUMAR

JUDGMENT: J U D G M E N T

(With office report )

WITH CRL.APPEAL NO. 1236 of 1999 (With office report)

Date: 23/02/2005  These Appeals were called on for hearing today.

CORAM :         HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.P. SINGH         HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR

For Appellant(s)        Ms.Avneet Toor, Adv.                 For Mr.D.P.Singh, Adv.                    Mr Vinay Kumar Garg,Adv.

For Respondent(s)       Dr.Sumant Bharadwaj, Adv.                 Mr.A.C. Jain, Adv.                         Ms. Mridula Ray Bharadwaj,Adv.   

          UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following                                O R D E R  

       The appeals are dismissed in terms of the signed judgment.   

       (Sheetal Dhingra)                          (Vijay Dhawan)             Court Master                            Court Master                 [Signed Non-Reportable judgment is placed on the file] IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL  APPEAL No.1235 OF 1999

STATE OF HARYANA                                  Appellant (s)

                       VERSUS

SATISH KUMAR                                     Respondent(s)   WITH CRL.APPEAL NO.1236/1999

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2  

B.P. SINGH,J.                   We have heard counsel for the appellant State  and also perused the order of the  High Court.            In a case under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred  to as ’the Act’) the High Court after considering the evidence on record found that the  prosecution has not been able to make out a case under Section 16(1)(a)(ii) read with Sectio n 7 of  the Act.  It accordingly allowed the appeal and acquitted the respondent.         We have gone through the material on record and heard counsel for the appellant.   We find no reason to interfere with the order of acquittal.         These appeals are, therefore, dismissed.