DHARAM VEER, J. - (1.) THIS criminal re­vision preferred, under section 397/401 of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 thereinafter to be referred as Cr.P.C.) is di­rected against the judgment and order dated 20.07.1995 passed by Chief Judicial Magis­trate, Nainital in Criminal Case No. 233/1993, State v. Umesh Chandra Joshi, whereby the Chief Judicial Magistrate has convicted the revisionist-accused under sec­tion 7/16 of The Prevention of Food Adul­teration Act, 1954 thereinafter to be refereed as an Act) read with Rule-44-A and sen­tenced him to undergo 2 years' R.I. with fine of Rs. 2, 000/-. In default of payment of fine further six months' simple imprisonment was awarded to the revisionist-accused and against the judgment and order dated 8.9.1997 passed by II Addl. Sessions Judge, Nainital, in Criminal Appeal No. 20 of 1995, Umesh Chandra Joshi v. State of U.P. whereby the appeal of the revisionist-accused was partly allowed and the conviction of the re­visionist-accused was upheld but the sen­tence of 2 years' R.I. was reduced to six months' R.I. and the fine of Rs. 2, 000/- im­posed by the Trial Court against the revi­sionist-accused is confirmed.
(2.) I have heard Sri L.K. Tewari, learned Counsel for the revisionist and Sri Harish Pujari, learned Addl. Govt. Advo­cate for the State and perused the record of the case. Brief facts of the case are that on 14.1.1993 at 12:00 noon PW-1 Sri B.S. Bisht, Food Inspector, inspected the shop of the revisionist-ai-rmpd situated at Tallital-Bhimtal, P.S. Bhimtal, District Nainital, af­ter introducing himself. He found the revi­sionist-accused selling pulses, spices, flour and rice etc. After giving notice Ext.Ka-1 he purchased 750 grams of pulse of Ghana at a price of Rs. 9/-. He distributed the sample into three equal parts and packed in a clean and dry polythene leak proof bags. There­after, he sealed them and fixed seal mohar over it. He got the thumb impressions of revisionist-accused and made an inspection note. The inspection note was read over to the revisionist-accused and the witnesses. Their signatures were taken over it. The sample was sent to Public Analyst, Lucknow for chemical examination. As per the report of the public analyst dated 24.2.1993 Ext. Ka. 9, the sample was found adulterated on account of mixing 0.83% Khesari gram, which was prohibited as food grain. The copy of the report was sent to the revisionist-accused. The revisionist-accused applied in the Court for sending the sample to Central Food Laboratory, Calcutta. According to its report Ext. Ka.14, the sample was found adultered and it was found 2.5% mixing Khesari gram. After taking the sanction Ext. Ka-11 of the Chief Medical Officer, Nainital, the compliant Ext. Ka-12 was filed before the Chief Judi­cial Magistrate, Nainital.
(3.) THEREAFTER , the charge was framed against the revisionist-accused under sec­tion 7/16 read with Rule 44-A of the Act and Rules. Charge'was read over and ex­plained to the accused-revisionist who pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.;