ABDUL WAHAB Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is directed against the order of the learned Sessions Judge, Tiruchirapalli, confirming the conviction of the revision petitioner under sections 7(f) and 16(i)(a)(i) read with section 2(1a)(a) and (m) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and the sentence of rigorous imprisonment for six months and of a fine of Rs.1,000.00 imposed thereunder by the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Ariyalur, in C.C.No.1045 of 1980 in his file.

(2.) On 22.4.1980 at about 11.00 a.m., P.W.1, the Food Inspector, purchased about 600 grams of chilly powder from Janata Stores, the shop of the revision petitioner, at Bazaar Street, Perambalur. After observing all the formalities, he divided the chilly powder purchased in three equal parts and sealed them in three polythene bags and sent one to the Public Analyst and the other two to the Local (Health) Authority. The report of the Analyst revealed that the sample contained ash absolute in dilute Hydrochloric Acid in excess of the maximum permitted limit to the extent of 169 per cent. On the basis of this report, a complaint was laid. The trial Court found that the sample was adulterated within the meaning of section 2 of the Act, and convicted and sentenced the revision petitioner as stated above. In appeal, the conviction and the sentence were confirmed. The revision petitioner challenges the conviction and the sentence imposed, in this revision.

(3.) Mr. N.T.Vanamamalai, learned Counsel for the revision petitioner, pointed out that chilly powder, being primary food, fall in standard is due to natural causes beyond the control of human agency and therefore the article shall not be deemed to be adulterated within the meaning of section 2 of the Act. Under Article 2(1a)(m) an article shall be deemed to be adulterated if the quality or purity of the articles, being primary food, falls below the prescribed standards or its constituents are present in quantities not within the prescribed limits or variability but which does not render it injurious to health. The proviso to that sections runs thus: