MOHAMMEDKUTTY Vs. FOOD INSPECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is the 2nd accused in S.T. No. 6 of 1988. He was tried along with another for offences under S.16(1) (a) read with S.7(1) and 2(ia) and (m) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and R.44(b) of the Food Adulteration Rules, 1955. The Trial Court convicted the petitioner as well as other accused and sentenced each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- each and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for a further period of three months each. The appellate Court, on appeal, while confirming the conviction and sentence imposed upon the petitioner, acquitted the other accused. Hence this revision.

(2.) The case of the prosecution is that the complainant - PW.3 at about 9.45 on 5.5.1988 purchased 750 m.l. of cows milk from the petitioner who was the salesman from a can which was kept in the premises of a tea shop at Olingara. The purchased quantity was taken in three bottles and one of the bottles was sent for analysis and the Public Analyst by Ext. P13 report opined that the sample does not conform to the standards prescribed for cows milk. Thereafter, the complaint was laid against the petitioner and the other accused, on 7.6.1988. On receipt a notice under S.13(2) of the Act, the petitioner requested the Court to send the other sample to the Central Food Laboratory and accordingly it was sent. The report, Ext. Cl was received from the Central Food Laboratory.

(3.) To prove the case against the petitioner, the prosecution examined PWs. 1 to 4 and marked Exts. P1 to P18. Ext. Cl was marked as court exhibit. On the evidence adduced both oral and documentary, the Court below convicted and sentenced the petitioner for the offences with which he was charged as stated above.