MANIRAJ Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petitioner is the 1st accused in CC No.279/1997 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class -1, Thararassery and the appellant in Crl.Appeal No.536/2001 on the file of the Additional Sessions Court, Fast Track, (Adhoc-II) Kozhikode .

(2.) By judgment dated 25.09.2001, the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Thamarassery convicted and sentenced the accused to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 30 days for offences punishable under Section 16(1)(a)(i) r/w Section 2(ia)(a) and (m) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act . Challenging the conviction and sentence, the 1 st accused preferred Criminal Appeal No.536/2001 before the Sessions Court, Kozhikode. The learned Sessions Judge made over the case to the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track, (Adhoc-II), Kozhikode for hearing. The learned Additional Sessions Judge dismissed the appeal on 30.09.2005 confirming the conviction and sentence imposed by the learned magistrate. Feeling aggrieved, the accused has preferred this revision.

(3.) The prosecution case in brief is that, on 22.01.1997 at about 3 p.m, PW1, the Food Inspector, Kunnamangalam Circle inspected the shop room bearing No. KP 4/455 KML Gramina Oil Mills, Pannur and purchased 450 ml of gingelly oil from the 1st accused. The 2nd accused was the owner of the shop room and the 1st accused was conducting business therein for and on behalf of the 2 nd accused. After complying with all legal formalities for sampling, one sample was sent to the Public Analyst for report. The Public Analyst submitted his report stating that the sample does not conform to the standard prescribed for the gingelly oil and hence adulterated.