GHARIB DASS Vs. STATE AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant has been convicted under Sections 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and sentenced to 6 months S.I. and a fine of Rs. 1000.00by the trial court. His conviction was maintained in appeal by the Sessions Judge, Muzaffarnagar, but the sentence of imprisonment imposed upon him was reduced to 3 months S.I. and a fine of Rs. 500.00. In default of payment of fine he was to undergo 1 months S. I. Hence this revision.

(2.) I have heard learned counsel for the applicant and have also perused the impugned order.

(3.) According to the prosecution case the Food Inspector had purchased a sample of Saunf (fennel) from the shop of the applicant at 10.30 A.M. on 13-9-1977 in accordance with the procedure prescribed bylaw. One of the sample phials was sent for report to the Public Analyst whose report disclosed that the sample was adulterated and was not according to the standard prescribed for Fennel. After obtaining sanction the applicant has been prosecuted and convicted as above.