PAVUNNI Vs. GEORGE VARGHESE AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petitioner herein challenges the conviction and sentence against him under Sections 2(i)(a) (m), 7(i)(v) and 16(1)(a)(i) and (ii) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (for short "the PFA Act") in S.T. No. 148 of 1997 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Chalakudy. He faced prosecution at the instance of the Food Inspector, Chalakudy Municipality on the allegation that on 02.09.1996, he sold adulterated cinnamon whole to the Food Inspector. The Food Inspector purchased a quantity of 450 gms of cinnamon for an amount of Rs. 76.50/-, and after compliance of the procedural formalities prescribed under the PFA Act and Rules, one part of the sample of cinnamon was got examined by the public analyst. Accepting the report of the analyst, that on analysis the sample was found adulterated, the Food Inspector initiated prosecution against the accused. Though he received notice under Section 13(2) of the PFA Act, the accused did not take steps to get the second sample analysed. Accordingly, the prosecution proceeded.

(2.) The accused appeared before the learned Magistrate and pleaded not guilty, when the substance of the accusation was read over and explained to him. The complainant examined four witnesses, and proved Exts.P1 to P19 documents in the trial court.

(3.) The accused denied the incriminating circumstances when examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., 1973. He did not adduce any evidence in defence.