Gurnarn Singb, J. - (1.) Lal Chand son of Dewan Chand, resident of Jullundur, was tried for the offence under section I6(l)(a) read with section 7 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jullundur. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jullundur, convicted Lal Chand under section 16(l)(a) read with section 7 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500.00 or, in default, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. Lal Chand filed an appeal in the Court of Sessions at Jullundur. He did not contest the findings on facts and simply urged that the sentence awarded to him was excessive. The learned Sessions Judge maintained the conviction but reduced the sentence to one and a half years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 2000.00 or, in default, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. Lal Chand was not satisfied with the reduction allowed by the learned Sessions Judge and filed this revision petition. The revision petition was admitted only on the question of sentence.
(2.) The allegation against the petitioner was that he was a manufacturer of vinegar, that on J 5-4-1974 at 11-45 P.M., Dr. S.P. Mago, Deputy Chief Medical Officer, Jullundur, visited the premises of the petitioner and after disclosing his identity gave him notice Exhibit P.A. and purchased 3 bottles of vinegar, each containing 600 M.Ls. of vinegar, for Rs. 2.70 Ps. vide receipt Exhibit P.B. The bottles were labelled, stoppered and sealed with the seal of the doctor. One sealed bottle was given to the accused and the other was sent to the Public Analyst and the third was deposited for safe custody with the Chief Medical Officer. The sample was taken in the presence of Santokh Singh.
(3.) The report of the Public Analyst is that the sample contained acid coal tar dye, the use of which in synthetic vinegar is prohibited and the acidity of acetic acid was 2.88% against the minimum prescribed standard of 3.75%. The Public Analyst reported that the sample was adulterated.;