S.I.Jafri - (1.) DESH Raj s/o Aya Ram resident of 183, Chukhuwala P. S. Kotwali, has filed this revision against his conviction under Section 7/16 Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and sentence of six months R. I. and a fine of Rs. 1,000/- affirmed by Sri V. K. Agarwal, Additional Sessions Judge, Dehradun, by his judgment and order dated 8-12-81 in Criminal Appeal No. 166 of 1980 arising out of criminal case no. 384 of 1980, Food Inspector v. DESH Raj. decided by Sri Sukhvir Singh, Munsif Magistrate, Dehradun. The learned Sessions Judge while confirming the conviction of the applicant had reduced the sentence of imprisonment from 9 months to six months R. I. and a fine of Rs. 1000/- Instead of Rs. 1500/-.
(2.) FOOD Inspector B. S. Jayra, PW 2 had filed the complaint against the applicant Deshraj under section 16 (I) (g) (i) (ii) of the Prevention of FOOD Adulteration Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) in the court of the Judical Magistrate, Dehradun. It was alleged by the prosecute that on 30-6-1978 at about 8 A. M., C. B. Naitbani, Food Inspector visited the Diary of the applicant and found him exhibiting Cow milk for sale without licence. The Food Inspector disclosed his identity and gave a notice Ex. Ka-a stating that the applicant was not having any licence for sale of the milk and displayed no notice board as required under Rule 50 of the Act. The Food Inspector purchased 600 ml. of cow milk and paid Rs 1.65 to the applicant as price of the milk and obtained a receipt Ex. Ka-2 from the applicant. The Food Inspector also gave a notice Ex. Ka-3 to the applicant as required under rule 12 in Form VI disclosing his intention that the sample of the milk was to be taken for analysis by the Public Analyst. The Food Inspector took milk in three clean bottles. He also added 18 drops of formaline in each bottle as preservatory the Food Inspector then labelled and marked and sealed the phials according to rules. Out of these samples one sealed bottle was sent to the Public Analyst along with form VII on the same day by the Food Inspector. The other two bottles were deposited in the office of the Local Hearth Authority Dehradun. The Public Analyst report No. 15330/ dated 28-7-78 Ex. K-5 disclosed Milk Fat 4.3% and non-fatty solids 5.7%. The sample was found to be deficient in non-fatty solids by 33% and as such, it was adulterated. The Food Inspector B. S. Jayara PW 2 obtained sanction from the Local Health Authority on receipt of the report of Public Analyst as required under section 20 of the Act and filed the complaint on 14-4-1979 to prosecute the accussed in the court. A copy of the report of the Public Analyst together with the letter of C. M.O. was sett to the applicant as required under section 13 (2) of the Act.
(3.) SRI Keshav Sahai, learned counsel for the applicant contended that in this case sample was taken on 30-6-78 by the Food Inspector and it was analysed by the Public Analyst on 28-7-1978. A copy of the report of the analysis was sent to the applicant on 9-4-1979 i.e. after 283 days of the taking of the sample and the complaint was filed in the court on 14-4-1979 i.e. after 288 days of taking of the sample from the applicant. I have heard the learned counsel for the applicant and also the learned Government Advocate for the State at great length and I feel that this revision application must be allowed and the conviction and sentence recorded by the court below deserves to be set aside.;