JWALA PRASAD Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this case, the applicant (Jwala Prasad) was sent up to stand his trial under Sec. 7/16, Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. The case against him was that on 23rd Nov., 1975 he was found selling adulterated milk. The sample of milk taken from him was sent to the Public Analyst, Lucknow for analysis and report and he found the sample milk to be deficient in non-fatty solids contents. Subsequently, the sample milk was sent to the Director, Central Food Laboratory at Calcutta also for analysis and report and he too reported that it was adulterated. Accordingly, the applicant was prosecuted by the Food Inspector after the latter had obtained the necessary sanction for his prosecution from the authority concerned. The defence of the applicant was that he had not sold any milk to the Food Inspector. His defence was found to be false by the trial Court. The trial Court held that the applicant had sold milk to the Food Inspector against price and the milk so sold was adulterated. Accordingly, the trial court convicted the applicant under Sec. 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and sentenced him to a fine of Rs. 2000.00. Aggrieved, went up in appeal but in vain and hence this revision.

(2.) No one turned up on behalf of the applicant to press this revision. I, therefore, went through the record of the case myself with the help of the learned State Counsel. In my opinion, the conviction of the applicant in this case is absolutely correct and it calls for no interference. There is enough evidence in this case to show that the applicant had sold milk to the Food Inspector and that milk was found to be adulterated both by the Public Analyst, Lucknow as also by the Director, Central Food Laboratory, Calcutta/ The applicant was, therefore, rightly convicted in this case.

(3.) In the result, I find no force in this revision and dismiss it accordingly. The order dated 11-1-80 staying realisation of fine is vacated. Petition dismissed.