STATE Vs. T PONNIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AGAINST the acquittal of the respondent by the trial Court, who stood charged under sections 7 (i) and 16 (1) (a) (i) read with section 2 (i-a) (a) and (m) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (Central Act XXXVII of 1954), the above appeal has been filed by the State.

(2.) IT appears from the facts of the case that on 30th May, 1977 at 12.30 p.m. P.W. 1, the Food Inspector went to the grocery shop of the respondent and for the purpose of taking sample, he purchased 750 grams of poppy seeds (Khas-Khas) for Rs.4.65 after serving Form VI notice, Exhibit P-1 and obtained a cash receipt Exhibit P-2 from the respondent. Thereafter, P.W. 1 divided the sample into three parts, put it in three bottles and sealed them. One bottle was sent to the Public Analyst as required under the Act for the purpose of analysis and two bottles were sent to local health authority. The Public Ana-lyst in his report Exhibit P-8 has observed that no change has taken place in the constitution of the article sent to him that would interfere with the analysis. He obtained the oil after crushing the khas-khas sent to him and found that the oil contained -free fatty acids in excess of permitted limit to the extent of 83 per cent-. On receipt of the report Exhibit P-8, P.W.1 sent a copy of the same to the respondent and filed the above case against him under the aforesaid section.

(3.) THE trial Court on the evidence adduced by the prosecution, came to the conclusion that an article like khas-khas obtained and purchased by P.W. 1 from the respondent and kept in a sack is liable to be affected by moisture, air, heat and similar vicissitude of climatic conditions and that it was an accepted fact that a primary food like poppy seeds (Khas-Khas) placed in such a container and sack is liable to undergo certain changes and under the circumstances, it cannot be said that the commodity sold by the respondent to P.W. 1 was an adulterated one and therefore, acquitted the respondent.