NAINAPATI Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision under Section 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is directed against order dated 30/6/2011 passed by Additional Sessions Judge (Ex-Cadre), Court No. 1, Jalaun at Orai in Sessions Trial No. 212 of 2010, Stete v. Nainapati under Section 60 Excise Act and Sections 272 / 273 IPC, P.S. Konch, whereby application of the accused-revisionist for taking another sample from the case property and sending it to another expert was rejected.

(2.) THE revisionist is facing trial under Sections 272 / 273 IPC for possessing illicit liquor, which was found by the Public Analyst to be injurious to health and unfit for human consumption, as the sample was found containing urea.

(3.) LEARNED A.G.A. supported the impugned order and submitted that there is no reason to doubt the report of Public Analyst and without any substantial cause, the sample cannot be sent to Central Food Laboratory and the provisions of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act are not applicable in the instant case.