RAJAN Vs. FOOD INSPECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is the first accused in S.T. 16/1983 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate's court, Tellicherry. He, along with another, was prosecuted for offence under S.2 (ia) (m) read with S.7 (i) and S.16 (1) (a) (i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'. The petitioner was the salesman and his coaccused was described as the owner of the grocery shop. After trial the Chief Judicial Magistrate found the petitioner guilty of the offence and convicted him thereunder. He was thereupon sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-. In default of payment of fine be was directed to suffer simple imprisonment for two months more. The 2nd accused was acquitted. The said conviction and sentence were challenged before the lower appellate court in criminal Appeal No. 137/1987. The Learned Sessions Judge dismissed the appeal. Hence this Revision Petition.

(2.) The prosecution version of the incident is as follows. Pw. 5 is the Food Inspector. He visited the grocery shop, where the petitioner was the salesman, on 10-6-1983. From the chilli powder kept in the shop be purchased 600 gms after revealing his identity, for the purpose of analysis. That quantity was sampled in accordance with the Act and Rules. One sample was sent to the Public Analyst. The remaining two samples were sent to the Local (Health) Authority as per the Rules. On analysis that sample was found adulterated. Thereupon the prosecution was launched. Notice under S.13(2) of the Act was scot to the accused.

(3.) To bring home the guilt of the accused Pws. I to 5 were examined and Exts. P1 to P.25 were marked. Pw.1 is the peon attached to the office of the Food Inspector. pw. 2 is the independent witness who was called by the Food Inspector at the time of the purchase of the article and sampling. He turned hostile to the prosecution, pw. 3 is the Local (Health) Authority. Pw. 4 is the Executive Officer of the Panchayat and Pw. 5 is the Circle Food Inspector. At the instance of the petitioner one sample was sent to the Central Food Laboratory, Mysore for analysis. The certificate issued by the Director of Central Food Laboratory is marked as Ext. P11. The opinion given by the Director is: