Ajit Singh Bains, J. - (1.) The petitioner was convicted under section 16(a) (i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and sentenced to six months rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1,000.00 or in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for 11/2 months by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hoshiarpur. On appeal, his conviction and sentence was upheld by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur.
(2.) It was urged on behalf of the petitioner that no standard is prescribed for raya oil and the standard prescribed for mustard oil is applied in this case. He relied upon the authority quoted as Lekh Raj Vs. The State 1980 (11) FAC 166. This authority is not applicable in the present case as in Lekh Raj's case (supra) the standard prescribed for ice-cream was applied in case of fruit cream. Fruit cream is entirely a different article of food than the ice-cream. In the present case sample of raya-toria-sarson-oil, was taken from the petitioner and it is the same species. The sample was got examined from two places one from the Public Analyst, Punjab, and the second from the Director, Central Food Laboratory, Calcutta and it was found adulterated vide its report exhibit D.A.
(3.) It was then urged that it was recovered from the back portion of the premises. I do not find any merit in this contention also. The courts below have rightly relied upon the testimony of the Food Inspector that it was meant for sale. The finding of the trial court as well as the appellate court based on evidence is unassailable. Accordingly I am of the view that no case is made out for interference in the exercise of the revisional jurisdiction of this Court under Sec. 401 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973. It is a matter of common knowledge that the menace of food adulteration has reached the saturation point. There is hardly any food article which is pure, It is an anti-social crime. Accordingly this petition is dismissed. Petition dismissed.;