S.S.Sidhu, J. - (1.) Gurdev Singh was convicted under section 16(1 )(a) read with section 7 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act), and sentenced to undergo one year's rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000.00, or in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for four months, by the Court of Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Jullundur (Shri Hardial Singh) vide its judgment dated 28th Aug., 1972. On an appeal being preferred against his said conviction and sentence, the Additional Sessions Judge, Jullundur (Shri Harbans Singh) vide his judgment dated 26th Sept., 1972, maintained his,conviction but reduced his sentence to six months' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500.00 with the direction that in default of payment of fine, he shall further undergo rigorous imprisonment for four months. Feeling aggrieved against the aforesaid judgment of the appellate Court, Gurdev Singh has come up in revision to this Court.
(2.) Briefly stated the facts of the case are that on 14th Nov., 1968, at about 9.45 A.M. Shri Madanjit Singh, Government Food Inspector, P.W. 1, intercepted Gurdev Singh accused at the shop of Karam Singh Pal Singh at Banga where he had brought about 20 Kg. of cow's milk for sale in a drum. In the presence of Vishva Mitter Hakim P.W. 2 and Pal Singh P.W. 3, the aforesaid Food Inspector served the notice, Exhibit P.A., on Gurdev Singh expressing his intention to get a sample of milk contained in his drum for analysis. The notice was thumb-marked by Gurdev Singh accused and attested by Vishva Mitter and Pal Singh P.Ws. After thoroughly stirring the milk contained in the drum of Gurdev Singh, the Food Inspector purchased 6(j0 nils, of milk out of that milk on payment of 65 paise to Gurdev Singh against the receipt, Exhibit P.B., which too was thumb-marked by Gurdev Singh and attested by the aforesaid two prosecution witnesses. The purchased sample of milk was divided into three equal parts and each part was put into a dry and clean empty bottle and thereafter the aforesaid three bottles were labelled, stoppered and sealed by the Food Inspector after he had added 16 drops of formalin to the contents of each bottle. One sealed sample bottle was then given by him to Gurdev Singh accused, vide sampling memo. Exhibit P.C., contents of which were read over and explained to the accused and the prosecution witnesses. Exhibit P.C. was thumb-marked by the accused and attested by those two prosecution witnesses. The second sealed bottle was sent to the Public Analyst for analysis. Copy of the memorandum and specimen of the seal used for sealing those sample bottles were sent to the Public Analyst separately through registered post. The Public Analyst vide his report, Exhibit P.D., opined that the sample of milk was found to be deficient in milk solids not fat by 20 per cent of the minimum prescribed standard.
(3.) Thereafter, Shri Madanjit Singh, Government Food Inspector, P.W.l, filed a complaint against. Gurdev Singh in die Court of the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Jullundur Shri Hardial Singh) for being prosecuted and punished for the commission of offence under section 16 (I) (a) read with section 7 of the Act. That Court, after trial, convicted and sentenced Gurdev Singh accused as already stated above. An appeal filed by Gurdev Singh against his said conviction and sentence met with the fate about which also mention has been made above.;