KARUNAN Vs. FOOD INSPECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner. who has been convicted for selling adulterated buffalo's milk. is the revision petitioner after having lost in appeal before the Sessions Court.

(2.) THE Food Inspector. PW. 1. purchased from the petitioner on 16-2-1979 675 M. L. of buffalo's milk. THE milk was analysed and ext. P3 is the report of the analyst. THE result of the analysis and his opinion as shown in Ext. P8 read thus: and am of the opinion that the said sample does not conform to the standards prescribed for Buffalo Milk under the Prevention of food Adulteration Rules. 1955 and is therefore adulterated. I am further of opinion that the same contains not less than Twenty two percent (22. 0 per cent) of added water as calculated from the milk Solids not fat content. No decomposition had taken place in the sample that would interfere with the analysis. "

(3.) THE second contention is that the Analyst. without conducting the necessary test. has found that there was added water only on the basis of his calculation of the milk solid-not-fat contained as seen from Ext. P8. This cannot be accepted.