AMAR SINGH Vs. THE STATE OF PUNJAB
LAWS(P&H)-1979-9-50
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Decided on September 21,1979

Appellant
VERSUS
Respondents

JUDGEMENT

I.S. Tiwana, J. - (1.) The petitioner has been held guilty under section 16(l)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and has been awarded rigorous imprisonment for six months and a fine of Rs. 1000.00 in default of payment thereof to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for two months.
(2.) The allegations in brief against the petitioner are that on 25th March, 1971, Sita Ram Sharma, Food Inspector, purchased 750 grams sample of cows milk from him and put the same in three dried bottles. After adding 18 drops of formalin into each bottle, the same were packed, labelled and sealed properly. One such sealed bottle was passed on to the accused-petitioner and another was sent to the Public Analyst for analysis, which later was found to be adulterated.
(3.) Now, the primary argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner has. been seriously prejudiced in availing of his right under section 13(2) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) as the sample summoned from the office of the Civil Surgeon Ludhiana, (the one which had been retained by the Food Inspector) at the instance of the petitioner was not sent to the Director, Central Food Laboratory, Calcutta, in spite of his having made a prayer in writing to that effect to the trial Court. This argument of the learned counsel has no weight on the facts and circumstances established "'From record. Firstly, the petitioner could only make a genuine grouse in this regard, had it not been he who is to be blamed for the loss of this right. Secondly to my mind, the petitioner could not insist upon the sample with the complainant to be sent to the Central Food Laboratory under section 13(2) of the Act, as it then was, unless he could give any reasons for not sending the sample in his possession. The provisions of section 13(2) of the Act have only given parallel rights to the complainant and the accused to get the sample analysed in case either of them feels dissatisfied with the report of the Public Analyst.;


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