Muminul Islam Mazumder vs. The State Of Assam

Held

The Court held that while the report from the food analyst is important to ascertain if the seized betel nuts are fit for human consumption, and their unsuitability could pose a health risk to the public, the alternative prayer made by the petitioner to examine the seized betel nuts at any Central Forensic Science Laboratory in India can be allowed. The Court reasoned that the petitioner had produced E-Way bills and supporting documents to establish ownership. The impugned order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate was set aside. The petitioner was directed to file a fresh application before the learned Court below for sending samples to a Central Forensic Science Laboratory. The learned Court below will then dispose of the Zimma petition upon receiving the food analyst report from the Central Forensic Science Laboratory. The Investigating Officer was also directed to facilitate sending the samples to the Central Forensic Science Laboratory as per the Court's direction.

Facts

The petitioner, Muminul Islam Mazumder, filed a criminal revision petition challenging an order dated 13.10.2022 by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Cachar, Silchar. The Magistrate had rejected the petitioner's prayer for 'Zimma' (custody) of 85 bags of betel nuts seized in connection with Silchar P.S. Case No. 2133/2022. The petitioner claimed to have purchased the betel nuts locally, paid GST, and obtained E-Way bills for transportation. The seizure occurred when police suspected the betel nuts to be of Burmese origin. The petitioner argued that the Magistrate rejected the Zimma prayer solely on the Investigating Officer's objection regarding the pending report from the Food Safety and Agriculture Department, despite the seized goods being perishable and deteriorating.

Key Issues

1. Whether the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate erred in rejecting the petitioner's prayer for Zimma of the seized betel nuts solely on the ground of non-receipt of a food safety report from the Agriculture Department and the initial stage of investigation, contrary to the principles laid down in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State of Gujarat regarding perishable goods? Petitioner's arguments: The order is illegal as the Magistrate rejected the Zimma petition due to a pending food safety report and the Investigating Officer's objection. Section 451 of the Code of Criminal Procedure empowers the Magistrate to dispose of Zimma petitions. The Supreme Court in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai has emphasized expeditious disposal of perishable property. An alternative remedy exists by sending samples to a Central Forensic Science Laboratory for examination. Revenue's arguments: The Chief Judicial Magistrate rightly rejected the prayer for Zimma as a report from the Food Safety and Agriculture Department is essential to determine if the betel nuts are fit for human consumption. The petitioner failed to produce documents proving ownership of the seized betel nuts.