J.M. Tandon, J. - (1.) Dalip Singh (25) son of Mota Ram of village Sanga, District Bhiwani, stands convicted under section 16(l)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and sentenced to one years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1000.00 in default of payment further rigorous imprisonment for four months.
(2.) The Food Inspector accompanied by Dr. S.N. Majithia, found Dalip Singh petitioner in possession of four litres of cows milk on July 6, 1973, for public sale. The Food Inspector purchased 660 mili litres of cows milk from him at the market price. The purchased milk was put in three dry and clean bottles in equal proportion. He added 18 drops of formalin in each bottle. The bottles were sealed. One sealed bottle was given to the petitioner, another was deposited with the Chief Medical Officer, Bhiwani, and the third was sent to the Public Analyst. The Public Analyst found the sample deficient in fat to the extent of 55 per cent and in solids not fat to the extent of 52 per cent. The petitioner was challaned. The trial Court convicted and sentenced him, as stated above. Having failed in appeal before the learned Sessions Judge, Bhiwani, the petitioner has filed the present revision.
(3.) On receipt of report of the Public Analyst, a complaint, was filed in Court on July 16, 1973. The petitioner appeared in Court on Dec. 11,1973. The proceedings started. The prosecution evidence was concluded. On Nov. 2, 1974, when the petitioner was to close his defence, he submitted an application under section 13 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act praying that the sample of the milk handed over to him may be sent to the Director, Central Food Laboratory, Calcutta, for re-analysis. The trial Court allowed the application. The petitioner produced his sample before the trial Court on Nov. 6, 1974, when it was detected that the stoppers and the seals had been tampered with. The petitioner accepted that the stoppers and the seals of the sample bottle were not intact. He, however, requested that the third sample bottle be sent for re-analysis to the Director, Central Food Laboratory, Calcutta. The third sample was lying with the Chief Medical Officer, Bhiwani. The Food Inspector produced that bottle in Court on Nov. 20, 1974. The trial Court sent both the bottles in registered parcel to the Director, Central Food Laboratory, Calcutta, for analysis. The Director reported that the seals of both the bottles were not intact and there was sufficient indication to believe that the samples had been tampered with. The trial Magistrate relied upon the report of the Public Analyst and convicted the petitioner. In appeal, it was urged on behalf of the petitioner that he had been deprived of his statutory right of having the sample re-analysed by the Director, Central Food Laboratory, Calcutta, and for that reason he was entitled to be acquitted. The learned Sessions Judge held that the petitioner himself tampered with the sample of milk in his possession and as such he was not entitled to his legal right of having it tested from the Director, Central Food Laboratory, Calcutta. He also opined that the petitioner was as well responsible for tampering with the sample which was retained in the office of the Chief Medical Officer, Bhiwani.;