JAGDISH PRASAD GUPTA Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this revision the present applicant has challenged legality and propriety of the judgment dated 18.7.2001 passed by the Third Additional Sessions Judge, Baster at Jagdalpur, in Criminal Appeal No. 57/ 2000, affirming the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 30.3.2000 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Jagdalpur, in Criminal Case No. 479/99, whereby & where-under the Judicial Magistrate First Class after holding the applicant guilty for commission of adulteration of food and selling of food without license convicted him under Section 16 (1) (a) (i) and 16 (1) (a) (ii) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (for short 'the Act, 1954') and sentenced to undergo R.I. for six months and fine of Rs.1000/-, in default of payment of fine to further R.I. for two months and R.I. for one month and fine of Rs.200/-, in default of payment of fine to further S.I. for fifteen days.

(2.) As per case of the prosecution, the present applicant owner of Pankaj General Stores, Bodhghat Police Station Bodhghat. District Baster was selling food article including pulse Arhar Dal. On 28.5.93 shop of the applicant was inspected. After showing intention of purchase and analysis of arhar dal, the Food Inspector has purchased 750 gram arhar dal. After dividing the same in three parts kept the same in polythene pouches and after following the procedure prescribed, sent the same for analysis. As per analysis report Es.P/10, damaged grain was 6.21% and presence of artificial colour. Food was found adulterated. After obtaining sanction from the local Health Authority, complaint was lodged. Notice under Section 13 (2) of the Act, 1954 was issued to the applicant vide EX.P/13 which has received by acknowledgement EX.P/ 14. After providing opportunity of hearing to the parties, the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Jagdalpur has convicted and sentenced the applicant as aforementioned. Same was challenged before the appellate Court and the appellate Court by dismissing the appeal has affirmed the conviction and sentence of the applicant.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the judgment impugned, judgment of the trial Court and records of the Courts below.