S.S. Sandhawalia, J. - (1.) For having been found in possession of adulterated milk for public sale the petitioner was brought to trial before the Judicial Magistrate, Safidon, and convicted under Sec. 16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and sentenced to six monthsrigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1,000.00. On appeal the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jind, upheld the conviction and the sentence.
(2.) It is unnecessary to recount the facts in detail and it suffices to advert to those relevant to the twin argument raised on behalf of the petitioner. Admittedly the petitioner runs a tea-shop in village Kalwa and was found in possession of 4 kilograms of milk wherefrom a sample was taken, which on subsequent analysis was found to be adulterated.
(3.) Mr. J.K. Sharma first contends that the petitioner was merely a tea-stall holder and the milk found on the said stall could, therefore, not be deemed as being for sale. He contended that the same was only for the purpose of adding the same to tea and the statutory sale made to the Food Inspector would not bring the petitioner within the ambit of the offence for which he stands convicted.;