DURGA PRASAD Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant was prosecuted under Sections 7/16, Prevention of Food Adulteration Act.

(2.) The prosecution case is that on 29-3-1980 at about 4-30 P.M. the Food Inspector, P.H.C. Chaumuha during his visit of Mela Devi ji, Samari, P.S. Chhata, found the accused selling and exposing for sale "Laddoo Bundike" made of Vanaspati Ghee at his shop in the said Mela. The Food Inspector suspecting the Laddoos to be adulterated purchased Kgs. of the said Laddoos on payment of Rs. 10.50. The sample was thereafter prepared and sent to the Public Analyst. The Public Analyst gave opinion that the sample was adulterated as it was found to have been coloured with prohibited coaltar dye, Aramine. It was also found that the accused was dealing in the sale of sweetmeats without having in his possession any licence as required under rule 50(1) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules. After obtaining sanction front the Chief Medical Officer, Mathura, prosecution was launched against the applicant.

(3.) Before the trial court, the prosecution examined the Food Inspector, R.B. Mathur, and also produced another witness Shri Tota Ram. Shri Vinoy Kumar, Clerk to the Food Inspector, was also examined to prove that he has filled the second bottle containing the sample. The accused-applicant examined two witnesses in his defence. The trial court held the applicant guilty under Sec. 7/16 of the Act and sentenced him to undergo one years R.I. and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000.00. The accused was further sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 250.00 and in default to further undergo 15 days R.I. under Sec. 7/16 of the Act read with rule 50(1) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules. Feeling aggrieved, the applicant preferred an appeal which has also been dismissed.