HARJIT SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB
LAWS(P&H)-1993-8-124
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Decided on August 13,1993

HARJIT SINGH Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB Respondents

JUDGEMENT

A.S.NEHRA,J - (1.) THE petitioner was convicted under Section 16(1)(a) (i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and sentenced to undergo R. I. for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further R. 1. for a period of two months, by the CJM, Patiala on 16.1.1986. The appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed on August 18, 1986 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala. Hence this revision petition.
(2.) THE prosecution case in brief is as follows :- "On 18-11-1983 Dr. Nirmal Kumar vested, with the powers or Food Inspector under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 raided the Dhaba of Harjit Singh accused situated at Sool Road, Bahadurgarh At that time, Dr. Suresh Kumar was also with him. At the Dhaba of accused 10 Kgs. of cow milk was found lying in aluminium utensil for sale to the public. It was boiled milk. Harjit Singh accused was also found present at the Dhaba. Dr. Nirmal Kumar disclosed to the accused his identity that he was Food Inspector vested with the powers of Food Inspector for seizing samples of food stuff from the vendors and to have the same analysed from the Public Analyst, Punjab. Expressing this intention on his part he served notice Ex. PB upon the accused which was signed by the accused and attested by Dr. Suresh Kumar asking the accused to supply him 660 mls of cow milk boiled so that he could have the same analysed from the Public Analyst. Thereafter, Dr. Nirmal Kumar stirred the milk lying in the aluminium patila and made it homogenous. Accused then supplied him 660 ml of cow milk against receipt Ex. PC on receipt of Rs. 2.50 from him. Receipt Ex. LC was signed by Harjit Singh and attested by Dr. Suresh Kumar. Dr. Nirmal Kumar divided that quantity of milk into three equal parts. He put each of those parts into three dry and clean bottles. 18 drops of formalin each were added into each of those bottles as preservative. Bottles were stoppered, tightly labelled and wrapped in a thick paper. A paper slip bearing the signatures of the Local Health Authority and the Code number was pasted on the wrapper of each of the bottles lengthwise covering the mouth and bottom of the container and joining its ends. Each of the bottles was then secured with a strong twine and the bottles were then sealed at the spot with four distinct seals. Signatures of the accused were obtained on each part of the sample in a manner that those signatures partly appeared on the wrapper of the bottle and partly on the paper slip. Spot memo Ex. PD was prepared which was signed by the accused and Dr. Suresh Kumar. Sample bottle was sealed. It was sent to Public Analyst for analysis per special messenger. Specimen impression of the seal used to seal the sample was sent in a sealed packet to the Public Analyst, Bhatinda through the same special messenger. Remaining two parts of the sample alongwith memo in Form No. VII and specimen impression of the seal used were deposited with the Local Health Authority on the same day. On receipt of the report of the Public Analyst copy whereof was endorsed by the Public Analyst to the Food inspector, the Food Inspector instituted complaint Ex. PF against the accused. After instituting complaint Ex. PF against the accused, he informed the Local Health Authority about the institution of the complaint against the accused. Local Health Authority sent copy of the report of the Public Analyst to the accused under registered cover along with a forwarding letter calling upon him to have the sample re-analysed within 10 days of the receipt of the report of the Public Analyst by him, if he so wanted. The prosecution examined Sohan Lal Clerk PW 1, Dr. Nirmal Kumar PW 2 and Dr. Suresh Kumar PW 3.
(3.) THE accused when examined under Section 313 Cr. P. C. denied imputations appearing in prosecution evidence against him and stated that it is a false case. He further stated that he has no connection with the alleged shop or dhaba and that he is employed in the Punjab State Electricity Board, Patiala. To his defence, be examined Bant Kumar Sharda D. W. 1,;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.