GANPATLAL MANGILAL SHAH Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. Ashish M. Dagli, learned advocate for the applicant, Mr.N.J. Shah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent no.1 as well as Mr.K.I. Shah, learned advocate for respondent no.2 and perused the record.

(2.) PETITIONER herein is original accused who has been convicted by Judicial Magistrate First Class in PFA Case No.78 of 1995 vide its judgment and order dated 3.2.2000 under Section 7 and 16(1)(a) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954. Such judgment is confirmed in Criminal Appeal No.19 of 2000 preferred by the petitioner before the Sessions Court, Surat by Presiding Officer of 1st Fast Track Court, Surat vide impugned judgment and order dated 19.11.2005. By such impugned judgment, the Appellate Court has confirmed the conviction as aforesaid and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment of 1 year with fine of Rs.2,000/and to undergo 1 month simple imprisonment in default of payment of fine. Therefore, petitioner has challenged such order of conviction and sentence in this revision on the grounds set out in the memo of Revision Application.

(3.) THE sum and substance of the petitioner's case is to the effect that infact he is not dealing with the chilly powder which is alleged to be found as adulterated when its sample was collected by the complainant. The story and history from the point of collecting sample till filing the chargesheet is as usual in all other cases of similar nature and it is well described in both the judgments i.e. first judgment by the trial Court and the impugned Judgment by Appellate Court and, therefore, its reproduction is avoided. However, if we concentrate on the issues, which are required to be decided at this stage they are listed as under: