B.S.YADAV, J. - (1.) THE prosecution story in brief is that on 5.7.1978 PW2 Dr. Sham Lal Chalana, who in the relevant days, was invested with the powers of Food Inspector, accompanied by PW3 Dr. R.N. Singh, inspected the canteen of the petitioner situated at Qila Mubarak, Faridkot. He was found in possession of four kilograms of unindicated milk for sale. After observing the necessary formalities, PW2 Dr. Sham Lal Chalana purchased 660 ml of milk from the petitioner against payment of Rupee 1/60. He divided the sample milk into 3 equal parts and transferred the same into 3 dry and clean bottles. He also added 18 drops of formaline to each bottled. He complied with the necessary procedure about labelling and sealing of these bottles and sending one bottle to the Public Analyst. The Public Analyst vide his report Ex. PF, found the milk to be adulterated as if it was deficient in milk fat by 18 percent of minimum prescribed standard. Thereafter, a complaint was made in the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Faridkot for the prosecution of the petitioner.
(2.) THE prosecution examined PW1 Walaiti Ram, PW2 Dr. Sham Lal Chalana and PW 3 Dr. R.N. Singh in support of its case. At the close of the prosecution evidence, the petitioner was examined under section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and he denied the prosecution allegations. He pleaded that the sample was taken of cow's milk from one Ravi Kumar who was incharge of the canteen, while he (i.e. the petitioner) was asked to sign as a witness. He further stated that in the days of occurrence, the rate of cow's milk was Rs. 1.60 for 660 ml. In his defence the petitioner examined DW 1 Jaswant Singh who has stated that earlier he was working as a peon in B.DO.'s office at Faridkot and there is a canteen where milk is not sold. He further stated that in 1978, Ravi Kumar was incharge of that canteen and the rate of cow's milk in those days was Rs. 2.50 per kg. DW2 Niranjan Singh was examined to prove the rate of cow's milk in the days of occurrence.
(3.) THE learned trial Court found the petitioner guilty under section 16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (for short the Act) and convicted him accordingly and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for six months and pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-. It was also ordered that in default of payment of fine, the petitioner would further undergo rigorous imprisonment for 4 months.;