AMARESH KU.SINGH,J. - (1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor for the non -petitioner.
(2.) IN Criminal Case No. 7/78 State v. Thawardas and Ors. the petitioner was tried by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jodhpur on charge under Section 7 read with 16 of the Prevention of the Food Adulteration Act. After trial he was convicted and sentenced to under -go rigorous imprisonment for 6 months and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/ - and to further under -go rigorous imprisonment for 2 months for default in payment of fine. Feeling aggrieved by the conviction as well as sentence passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jodhpur the petitioner filed an appeal which was decided by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, No. 1, Jodhpur vide judgment dated 2nd February, 1988. The learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Jodhpur dismissed the appeal and confirmed the order passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate. In the above mentioned circumstances the petitioner has filed this revision petition with a prayer that conviction as well as sentence passed by the two Courts be set aside and he be acquitted of the charge under Section 7 read with 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act.
(3.) THE facts of the case so far they are relevant for the disposal of this petition may be summarised as below According to prosecution on 23rd April, 1977 at about 12.40 P.M. The Food Inspector went to the shop of Thawardas with a view to take samples for the purpose of chemical analysis. Thawardas used to sell coconut oil in his shop. In the presence of Mortbirs Food Inspector purchased the sample from Thawardas. Sample was placed in 3 separate bottles which were sealed then and there. One sample was sent to Public Analyst. The report of chemical analysis was received on 23rd May, 1977 and it revealed that the sample was of adulterated coconut oil.;