Shop owner behind bars, 19 years after being acquitted

Nineteen years after being acquitted in a case of food adulteration, a kirana (grocery) shop owner from Satara was recently made to surrender to the police after the Bombay High Court quashed the order that set him free.

On September 23, 1993, a food inspector visited Harishchandra Agarwal’s shop in Satara and purchased groundnut and rapeseed oil from packed tins. The inspector sent the samples to the State Public Health Laboratory in Pune the next day. The analyst’s report said the sample did not conform to the prescribed standards.

After obtaining the necessary permissions from the Joint Commissioner, Pune Division, and the Food and Drugs Administration, Pune, separate complaints were lodged against Agarwal.

Convicted by magistrate

The magistrate at Satara convicted Agarwal under the Prevention of Food and Adulteration Act and sentenced him to six months’ rigorous imprisonment and imposed a fine of ₹2,000. Agarwal challenged the order in the sessions court.

In 1999, the additional sessions judge at Satara reversed the magistrate’s findings on the solitary ground that the sanctioning authority did not apply his mind before giving sanction to prosecute Agarwal.

Typing discrepancy

The court said, “The food inspector had taken samples of three different oils, in respect of which three different cases have been filed against [Agarwal]. However, the sanction order is stereotyped or cyclo-styled and name[s] of oils are inserted later on in [the] blank space kept for entering [them].” The court said no reason was recorded as to why it was necessary to prosecute Agarwal in public interest.

It said the name of the oil was typed later on, as the colour and mode of type was quite distinct from the rest the contents of the order. It also said that the public analyst’s report did not say that there was any foreign substance in the oil, or that the oil was in injurious to health or unfit for human consumption. Hence, the court acquitted Agarwal.

State challenge

The government challenged the order in the High Court. Justice Bharati Dangre said, “The consent accorded by the Joint Commissioner is based on the existence of the material and it discloses application of mind by the concerned authority. It makes reference to the facts that the Authority has gone through the Public Analyst report as well as the relevant case papers placed before him before recording his satisfaction resulting into according of a consent.”

The HC allowed the appeal and quashed the acquittal order. It directed Agarwal to surrender before the magistrate in Satara and cancelled his bail bonds.