MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, JAMMU Vs. SADIQ MOHD
LAWS(J&K)-1999-1-9
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
Decided on January 28,1999

Municipal Council, Jammu Appellant
VERSUS
Sadiq Mohd Respondents

JUDGEMENT

ARUN KUMAR GOEL, J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel.
(2.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu, in File No. 1 -Cr. Appeal, on 17.3.1983. Appellant is aggrieved by the said judgment since it has resulted in the acquittal of the respondent, who was convicted by the trial Magistrate for having allegedly committed offence under Section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, (hereinafter referred to as the Act).
(3.) BRIEF facts giving rise to this case are that PW -Mehar Singh Dutta, Food Inspector, was at Gandhi nagar, Jammu, on 13.9.1980, when he found that the respondent was in possession of 10 kg. of milk meant for sale for public consumption in the area of Gandhi Nagar, Jammu. At such time, this PW was accompanied by Preetam Singh, Sanitary Supervisor. After having disclosed his identity as well as intention to draw sample of milk for getting it analysed, sample of milk was drawn against payment of Rs.1.70 paise at the spot. Further case of the appellant is that milk was stated to be mixedmilk. As per clause A.11, 01, 05 -a of the Appendix B of the Prevention of Food Rules it was required to have 4,5% of the milk fat and8.5% milk solid not fat as its contents. PW Mehar Singh has further gone on record to state that after drawing the sample it was put in a utensil and was distributed in three equal parts. Therefore, the milk was transferred into three dry and clean bottles. This was followed by addition of 20 drops of formaline as a preservative and bottles were packed as well as properly wrapped and sealed as required under the provisions of the Act and the Rules framed thereunder. Form No. VII was prepared at the spot and was delivered alongwith one bottle of sample to the Public Analyst for analysis, whereas other two samples alongwith Form No. VII were delivered in the office of Local Authority by him. It is further case of the appellant that specimen impression alongwith Form No. VII was also sent separately by registered post to the Public Analyst.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.