PRADEEP NANDRAJOG,J. - (1.) The petitioner has been convicted for an offence punishable under Section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954. The conviction is based upon FSL Report Exhibit-P9 opining that the sample of sesame seeds oil (Sarson Ka Tel) does not confirm to the prescribed standards under the Act.
(2.) The argument of learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner is short and simple. Drawing my attention to the testimony of Shri Om Prakash Kalla who appears as PW-1, learned Senior Counsel points out that during cross-examination on 08.03.1995 the witnesses admitted that he lifted the simple from a tin which was already open and there were two sealed tins of sesame seeds oil in the shop of the petitioner.
(3.) The proviso to Rule 12 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955 reads as under: "[Provided that in case where a food inspector draws a sample from an open container, he shall also draw a sample from the containing in original condition of the same article bearing the same declaration, if such container is available, and intimate this fact to the public Analyst.]";