MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI Vs. GOPI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal appeal has been brought on special leave having been granted by this Court under Sec. 417 (3), Code Criminal Procedure against the judgment of acquittal given by a magistrate 1st Class on 31-7-1968.

(2.) The prosecution case is that on 7-2-1968 at about 6.30 a.m. Shanti Nath Food Inspector (PW 1) purchased a sample of milk from respondent Gopi w'hen he was carrying cow's milk for sale near Town Hall, Queen's Garden, Delhi. He paid the necessary price and various documents (Exs. PA, PB, PC and PD) were executed. The sample was divided, as prescribed by the rules and one of the samples was sent to the Public Analyst for his report.

(3.) According to the report (Ex. PE), the same was found to be adulterated and the respondent was in due course placed on trial before a magistrate where the prosecution examined four witnesses. In addition to Shanti Nath (PW 1) Shri Navnit Lal, another Food Inspector (FW 4) was examined in support of the prosecution case. A public witness, namely, Shri Ram, son of Shri Sukh Bari Lal (FW 3) was also examined. The statement of the respondent was also recorded under Sec. 342 Code Criminal Procedure wherein he denied all the prosecution allegations and stated that he was an agriculturist and that he did not sell milk at all. He also stated that he was standing as a spectator on the spot and was falsely implicated in this case. In support of his case he examined two witnesses. The main reason which weighed with the trial Court, in giving the benefit of doubt and acquitting the respondent was that the provisions of Sec. 10(7) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act 1954 had not been complied with, inasmuch as FW 3 reached the spot only after the sample had been taken from the respondent. FW 3 had stated that a number of Food Inspectors were present on the spot who Were taking samples from different milk vendors. He admitted that about 18 to 20 bottles were lying filled at that time and it was therefore not possible to ascertain which of the samples was taken from the respondent. There Was a possibility that the sample obtained from the respondent got mixed up with samples taken from other milk vendors.