INDRASAN PRASAD Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant has been convicted under Sec. 7/ 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and sentenced to 6 months R.I., and a fine of Rs. 1000.00. His conviction and sentence has been maintained in appeal by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Deoria. Hence this revision.

(2.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also carefully perused the record of the case.

(3.) The prosecution story is that the Food Inspector of the Mobile Food Squad went to the hotel of the applicant at about 11.30 A. M. on 9th Aug., 76. He purchased meat curry which according to the applicant had been prepared in mustard oil. The sample was divided in three equal parts and kept in three bottles, which were, duly sealed on the spot. One of the sample phials was sent for analysis to the Public Analyst, whose report disclosed that the meat curry had been prepared in a mixture of mustard oil and linseed oil. It was, therefore, adulterated. After obtaining sanction a complaint Ex. Ka. 7 was filed on 3rd Feb., 1977 for the prosecution of the applicant. After the institution of the prosecution an intimation as required under Sec. 13 of the P. F. Act, was forwarded vide letter no. Ex. Ka. 8 dated 5th Feb., 77. Its postal receipt is Ex. Ka. 9. On these allegations, the applicant had been prosecuted and convicted as above.