RATANLAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE three Revision Applications have been referred by a Single Judge to a division Bench. In all these cases common questions of law are involved. We shall first deal with Cri. Revision No. 3 of 1962 Ratanlal v. State. The Sub-Divisional magistrate, Baran convicted Ratanlal accused under Section 16 (a) of the prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (Act No. 37 of 1954) (hereinafter called 'the Act') for selling adulterated ghee in the town of Baran which has a municipality. A complaint was filed against the accused after obtaining permission of the Vice-Chairman of the Municipality who was acting as Chairman in his absence. The accused admitted his guilt. The learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate sentenced the accused to three months' rigorous imprisonment and payment of rs. 500/-/- as fine. An appeal was filed by the accused in the Court of the additional Sessions Judge, Baran. The learned Judge of the lower appellate Court maintained the sentence of imprisonment but reduced the fine from Rs. 500/-/- to rs. 3oo/-/ -. Thereupon the accused filed the present Revision Application which came up for hearing before Bhargava, J. , who has referred it to a Division Bench as certain important questions of law are involved.

(2.) THE following points were urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner in support of this Revision application: -

(3.) FOR the determination of some of the points it is necessary to refer to Section 2 (vii) and 2 (viii) of the Act which define 'local area' and 'local authority' respectively, and also to the notification issued by the State Government declaring 'local area' for the purposes of the Act. Section 2 (vii) and (viii) run, as follows: (vii) 'local area' means any area, whether urban or rural, declared by the state Government by notification in the Official Gazette, to be a local area for the purpose of this Act: