A.S.NEHRA,J - (1.) THE petitioner was convicted under section 16(1)(a)(1) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (hereinafter called the Act) and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for four months by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kurushetra, on 19-10-1985. The appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed by the Sessions Judge, KUrukshetra, on 24.7.1986.
(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the facts of the prosecution are as under: "On 13-11-1981 Government Food Inspector intercepted the accused-petitioner having in his possession 30 Kgs of cow's milk contained in a drum for public sale. He disclosed his identity to the accused and also joined Bal Kishan as a witness on the spot and then served notice Exhibit PA on the accused. He purchased 660 mls of cow's milk for Rs. 1.40 paise under receipt Exhibit PB. The purchased milk was divided into three equal parts and was put into three dry and clean bottles., Eighteen drops of fomaline were added in each bottle as preservative. The bottles were stoppered, securely fastened and then wrapped in strong thick paper which was secured by means of paper strips bearing Code No. 662 and the seal of the Local Health Authority, Dr. S. Gupta, was pasted from neck to bottom of each bottle. He also sealed the bottles. The accused-petitioner also thumb marked the paper slip. The Food Inspector prepared memos Exhibits PA and PC One sealed bottle was sent to the Public Analyst, Haryana, Chandigarh, alongwith Form VII through Railway parcel. Report Exhibit PD, received from the Public Analyst, Haryana, Chandigarh, revealed that it contained milk fat 4.4. percent and milk solid not fat 7.1 per cent, i. e., 16.5 percent less than the minimum prescribed standard. Hence, complaint was filed by the Government Food Inspector. The prosecution examined PW-I Moti Ram, Government Food Inspector PW2 Dr Santosh Gupta. PW3 Dr. N. S. Yadav and PW4 Radhe Sham, Clerk of the office of CMO Kurukshetra.
(3.) THE trial court held that the case of the prosecution stands established from the testimony of the witnesses; that the accused-petitioner was in possession of 30 Kgs of cow milk for public sale; that the sample after analysis was found to be below the prescribed standard and that, as such, the petitioner was guilty of the offence punishable under section 16(1)(i) of the Act.;