SUNDAR DASS Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) An Additional Sessions Judge has made a recommendation for quashing the charge framed against the petitioner under section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act').

(2.) Sunder Dass, petitioner has a shop in Teliwara, Chowk Kishan Ganj, Delhi. He sells milk at this shop. On 9th July, 1970, O.P. Khuranna, Food Inspector of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi took from him a sample of cow's milk for analysis. The report of the Public Analyst showed the presence of Cane Sugar to the extent of 0.817%. He therefore, opined that "the same is adulterated due to the presence of 0.817 per cent of Cane Sugar (Sucrose)." Municipal Corporation of Delhi on the basis of this report filed a complaint under Sec. 7/16 of the Act against the petitioner. After recording the evidence of the Food Inspector and of R.N. Gujral, Additional Municipal Prosecutor, a charge was framed against the petitioner. Thereafter the petitioner went to the Court of Session.

(3.) The learned Additional Sessions Judge came to the conclusion that sugar cane was one of the preservatives specified in Class 1 under Rule 53 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules'). Relying on a an un-reported judgment of this court in Criminal Revision No : 284 of 1967 (Pooran Chand Vs. State (1) decided on 27th August 1969, he made the present recommendation.