' On 1-10-1998 at 10-00 a.m. Rana Muhammad Safdar, Municipal Corporation Magistrate 1st Class, Faisalabad received a secret information that one Iftikhar Ahmad alias Billu had installed a plant for preparation of adulterted chillies. He alongwith Shahid Mahmood Baig, Chairman, City Khidmat Comthittee, Faisalabad, Muhammad Arshad Chief Food Inspector, Hameed Kausar, Food Inspector and other employees of the Municipal Corporation, Faisalabad as well as the Police Officials posted in Police Station Civil Line, Faisalabad prepared a raiding party and went at the relevant place in Vehicle No,FDN-213. The chillies were being grinded in the machinery there in the premises.
Muhammad Amin, Ghulam Hussain, Muhammad Shafiq, Muhammad Qayyum co-accused as well as Iftikhar Ahmad alias Billu petitioner-accused (owner of the plant) were busy. The co-accused were apprehended at the spot while Iftikhar Ahmad alias Billu made good his escape. 800 kilograms of mixed chillies. Prepared through the Choker and use of red colour were found. The samples of the grinded chillies were taken into possession. And sent to the laboratory for analysis.
In the meanwhile general public started gathering there and is said to have raised the protest creating the law and order situation. The case property was handed over to the Foods Inspectors.
Rana Muhammad Safdar sent the complaint to the S.H.O. Police Station Civil Line, Faisalabad where formal F.I.R. No,515, dated 1-10-1998 was registered at 12-45 p.m. Under section 420, Pakistan Penal Code, section 3/4 of the Foodstuffs (Control) Act, 1958 and section 16 of the Maintenance of Public Order Ordinance, 1960. The petitioner moved the learned Court of Session at Faisalabad for his admission to pre-arrest bail which was dismissed on 3-11-1998. He was not arrested. Apprehending his arrest he has filed this petition for his admission to pre-arrest bail before this Court who has been allowed the interim relief.
3: I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned State Counsel and gone through the record before me. Without prejudice and without being disrespectful to Rana Muhammad Safdar, Magistrate 1st Class, Faisalabad; I would express that he was not aware about the correct law applicable in the matter when he sent the complaint after the raid to the S.H.O.
Police Station Civil Lines, Faisalabad. Section 3 of the Foodstuffs (Control) Act, 1958 is not applicable to the instant matter which governs the power of the Government to control, supply, distribution etc. Of the Foodstuffs while section 4 of the same Act, 1958 deals with the delegation of powers. As such I delete section 3/4 of the Foodstuffs (Control) Act, 1958 as the petitioner is not liable under the said sections. It is simply surprising that in the F.I.R. Section 16 of the Maintenance of Public Order Ordinance, 1960 has also been got incorporated by the complainant against the petitioner- accused. It is proper to refer to section 16 of the Maintenance of Public Order Ordinance, 1960 which provides that "whoever makes any speech; or by words, whether spoken or written or by signs or by visible or audible representations or otherwise publishes any statement, rumour or report; shall be punished with imprisonment which may extent to three years, or with fine, or with both if such speech, statement, rumour or report; causes or is likely to cause fear or alarm to the public or to any section of the public; furthers or is likely to further any activity prejudicial to public safety or the maintenance of public order". A perusal of the F.I.R. Has made out that the general public which gathered there raised the protest while Iftikhar Ahmad alias Billu petitioner-accused made good his escape who neither made any speech nor any representation in the aforesaid terms. As such section 16 of the Maintenance of Public Order Ordinance, 1960 is deleted. Section 420, Pakistan Penal Code is boilable and an accused is entitled to be admitted to bail as of right under section 496 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
4. However, the allegation against the petitioner is with respect to the mixing and selling of mixed chillies which were adulterated and were prepared through mixing the Choker and red colour. The offences with the aforesaid allegations are covered by the penal laws contained under sections 4, 5 and 6 of the Pur Food Ordinance, 1960. This bail application is disposed of with respect to the commission of the aforesaid offences. The gist of arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that as required under section 18 of the Pure Foods Ordinance, 1960, no sample was independently taken by any Inspector and that the presence of Rana Muhammad Safdar, Magistrate 1st Class, Municipal Corporation, Faisalabad has made out the same as suspicious and, thus, the benefit of doubt is to be derived by the petitioner-accused who had to file this petition to avoid the humiliation and unjust harassment against whom the F.I.R. Has been got registered for ulterior motive. I do not agree with him. As rightly pointed out by the learned State Counsel the samples were obtained by the Food Inspectors who accompanied the Executive Magistrate 1st Class and are named as Muhammad Arshad, Chief Food Inspector and Hameed Kausar, Food Inspector. They obtained the samples in terms of section 18 of the Pure Food Ordinance, 1960 which were sent to the Public Analyst, Municipal Corporation, Faisalabad. With respect to both the samples the Public Analyst has opined that the same were adulterated with foreign organic matter to the extent of about 70% with respect to each sample. It means that the grinded chillies taken into possession through two samples were adulterated and the petitioner was prima facie criminally liable in the matter. Sections 4, 5 and 6 of the Pure Food Ordinance, 1960 are reproduced as under for the proper appreciation and settlement of the matter:-- "4. Prohibition of mixing and selling mixed food.--- (1) No person shall mix, color, stain or powder or direct or permit any other person to mix, colour, stain or powder any food with any matter or ingredient--
(a) in contravention of the prescribed rules; or
(b) so as to render the food injurious to health with intent that the same may be sold in that State.
(2) No, person shall sell, offer, keep or store any food so mixed, coloured, stained or powdered.
5. Prohibition of sale, preparation, manufacture, import or export of unwholesome food intended for human consumption.--- No person shall, directly or indirectly, himself or by any other person--
(a) prepare, manufacture, keep or store for sale, sell or, offer to sell any food which is unsound, unwholesome, injurious to health or unfit for human consumption; or
(b) import or export any food in such manner or in such condition as renders it or is likely to render it injurious to health.
6. Prohibition of sale or manufacture for sale of food which is adulterated or misbranded or not of the nature, substance of quality demanded.---(1) No person shall, directly, or indirectly, himself or by any other person, prepare, manufacture, keep or store for sale, or sell or offer to sell any food--
(a) which is adulterated;
(b) which is misbranded;
(c) which is not of the nature, substance or quality demanded, or which it purports or is prepresented to be;
(d) for the sale of which a licence is required otherwise than in accordance with the conditions of the licence;
(e) in contravention of any other provision of this Ordinance or the rules.
(2) No person shall directly or indirectly, himself or by any other person, manufacture, sell, offer to sell, keep or store for sale any food notified in this behalf by Government, unless it is coloured in the manner prescribed.
(3) Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, prohibit or regulate the keeping, in any factory or wholesale business premises in which such articles of foods as are specified in the notification are manufactured or stored, or any substances like to be used as adulterants so as specified."
5. The punishment for the commission of the offences under sections 4, 5 and 6 of the Ordinance, 1960 is provided under section 23(3) of the said Ordinance, 1960, which is imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years and with fine, but the term of imprisonment shall not be less than one year and the fine shall not be less than one thousand rupees.
6. Learned counsel for the State has rightly canvassed that the petitioner is, prima facie, involved in a case of heinous nature affecting the health of the inhabitants of the area. It cannot be said that the F.I.R. Was registered with ulterior motives. Both the Food Inspectors accompanied the Magistrate 1st Class, whose presence is entitled to legal sanctity. The samples were taken from the premises of Iftikhar Ahmad alias Billu petitioner-accused where he has installed the machinery towards the completion of his nefarious activity. In the circumstances of the matter it is held that a person of the category/ilk of Iftikhar Ahmad alias Billu petitioner-accused shall not suffer humiliation and unjustified harassm ent at the hands of the Police and he is not entitled to be admitted to pre-arrest bail on merits.
7. For what has been said above, I see no merit in this petition and dismiss the same. The order of interim pre-arrest bail is recalled.
8. Since it is a matter of heinous nature, Iftikhar Ahmad alias Billu petitioner-accused has been put under the custody of Malik Muhammad Bashir, S.-I. Police Station Civil Lines, Faisalabad for proceeding further in accordance with law and for completing the investigation.
Pre-arrest . revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.