STATE OF GUJARAT vs SHAILESHBHAI MANSUKHLAL SHAH

The Supreme Court held that under Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, the accused is not required to pay the fee for a second analysis of food samples, as the amendment by Act 34 of 1976 converted the right to a second analysis into an unconditional legal right. The Court distinguished the Kerala High Court's decision in George Kutty from other High Court rulings, affirming the High Court's view that the obligation to pay the fee lies with the State or Local Authority. The appeal by the State of Gujarat was dismissed, upholding the High Court's order.