STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. CHHATTAR SINGH
LAWS(RAJ)-1968-1-10
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Decided on January 24,1968

STATE OF RAJASTHAN Appellant
VERSUS
CHHATTAR SINGH Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

MARSTON V. LONEY [REFERRED TO]
UDAI SINGH V. STATE [REFERRED TO]
PREM DAS VS. STATE [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)ACCUSED Chattar Singh was prosecuted in the court of City Magistrate, bharatpur, by the Municipal Council, Bharatpur, for an offence under Section 7 (1)read with Section 16 (1) (a) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954.
(2.)THE allegation against the accused was that on October 15, 1962, at about 6. 30 p. m. , he was found carrying milk in a drum on his cycle by Shri Gopal Prasad, food Inspector, P. W. 1. Shri Gopal Prasad took sample of milk and put it in 3 bottles, and after carrying out the necessary formalities prescribed under the rules framed under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, he sent one of the bottles to the Public Analyst, Rajasthan, Jaipur. On receipt of the report from the Public Analyst, to the effect that the milk was adulterated, the Municipal Council, bharatpur, filed a complaint in the court of City Magistrate, Bharatpur, against the accused as stated above. The complainant examined P. W. 1 Shri Gopal Prasad, P. W. 2 Shri Nand-Kishore, P. W. 3 Shri Shobha Ram, and P. W. 4 Shri Bakshi Ganpat singh. In his defence the accused also examined one Shri Showaran Singh, D. W. 1. The learned Magistrate found that it was proved that the sample of the milk was taken from the possession of the accused and further that It was proved to be adulterated. On the basis of these findings the accused was convicted under section 7 read with Section 16 (1) (a) of the Act and was sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 500/ -. in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for four months
(3.)AGGRIEVED of his conviction and sentence, the accused filed an appeal in the court of Sessions Judge. Bharatpur. It was contended, inter alia, before the learned Sessions Judge that the milk which the accused was found carrying was mixed milk of cow and buffalo and since no minimum standard was prescribed for such a mixed milk by the Rules framed under the Prevention of Food Adulteration act, 1954, the accused could not be said to have committed any offence and was entitled to acquittal. This argument found favour with the learned Sessions Judge and on this ground alone he acquitted the accused.
;


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