LEKH SINGH Vs. THE STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEKH Singh petitioner was sentenced to six months rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1000/ - by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ambala vide order dated 10th February, 1969 for his having contravened the provisions of Section 16(1) (a) (i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954. Appeal of the petitioner before the Sessions Judge, Ambala also failed but the sentence was reduced to four months rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 500/ - by an order dated 12th May, 1969. The accused has come up in revision to this Court.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution is that on 21st of May, 1965 Shri Gurdial Singh, Food Inspector stopped the appellant while he was carrying 25 Kilograms of cow's milk in a cane for sale and after he served him with a notice, Exhibit P.A. purchased 660 mililiters of cow's milk on payment of 60 paise as price vide Exhibit 'P.B.'. This sample was divided into three equal parts and each part was put in a dry clean bottle. Sixteen drops of formalin were added as a preservative to each of the bottles and the bottles were then sealed and labeled. One of the bottles was given to the accused while the second was sent to the Public Analyst and the third one was retained in the office by the Food Inspector. When the report of the Public Analyst was received it indicated that the sample of milk was adulterated and in view of this report a complaint was filed against the accused on the basis of which he was tried, convicted, and sentenced as above.

(3.) TO establish its case against the petitioner the prosecution produced Shri Gurdial Singh, Food Inspector (P.W. 1), Chamba Ram (P.W. 2) and Shankar Dass (P.W. 3) as witnesses of the fact that sample of cow's milk was taken from the accused and was then properly sealed after the milk had been put into three bottles and for mahn had been added. Out of these witnesses Chamta Ram did not support the prosecution case. Finding evidence of the food Inspector Shri Gurdial Singh and that of Shankar Dass to the worth of credence the learned trial Court convicted and sentenced him. While canvassing that the evidence of Shri Gurdial Singh and Shankar Dass be not accepted it was pointed out by the Learned Counsel for the petitioner that Shankar Dass was a peon of the Food inspector and his evidence was not worthy of credence, and that conviction should not be based on the testimony of these witnesses alone especially when the only independent witness Shri Chamba Ram had not supported the case of the prosecution. It was also canvassed before me that the complaint having been lodged after a considerable delay the petitioner was deprived of the right to have the sample tested from the Director of the Central Food Laboratory and that the denial of this right on account of the conduct of the prosecution so seriously prejudiced the petitioner that it would not be proper to uphold the conviction making the report of the Public Analyst as the basis of the finding that the milk was adulterated.