BALJEET SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner herein Baljeet Singh was convicted by the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Delhi, for an offence under section 16 read with section 7 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two months and also to pay a fine of Rs. 1000.00 and in default of payment of fine to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for four months. The conviction of the petitioner as well as sentence passed against him was confirmed on appeal by the Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi.

(2.) The prosecution case against the petitioner Is that on 27-3-1973 the Food Inspector of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi visited the shop of the petitioner situated in Block A, Ashok Vihar, Delhi, and found a certain quantity of curd of cow's milk kept in a vessel in the shop and purchased 600 grams of the said curd from the petitioner under the procedure prescribed by the Act and the Rules framed thereunder. The Food Inspector sent a sample of the curd purchased by him from the petitioner to the Public Analyst, who, after examining the said curd, sent his report to the effect that the curd was adulterated due to 0.34 deficiency in milk fat percent which is equivalent to 9.7 percentage deficiency in milk fat. The petitioner was, therefore, guilty of selling adulterated cow's milk curd.

(3.) The prosecution examined four witnesses in the trial Court of whom P.W. 2 is Shri Sardar Singh, Food Inspector of the Corporation, who purchased the curd from the petitioner and P.W. 3, Shri J.C. Pujari, Chief Sanitary Inspector, and P.W. 4, Shri R.L. Chugh, Assistant Sanitary Inspector of the Corporation, were the witnesses who were present at the time P.W. 2 purchased the curd from the petitioner. When examined under section 342 Cr. P.C., the petitioner admitted the purchase of the curd by the Food Inspector from his shop but stated that he did not keep the curd in his shop for sale but kept it for his own consumption. He also stated that the sample of the curd was not taken properly. He examined two witnesses in defence, namely, Shri K.L. Sethi and Shri Karan Singh who stated that the petitioner did not sell milk or curd in his shop.