HEERA LAL Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revisionist has been convicted under Sec. 7/16 of Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and sentenced to R.I. for one year and Rs. 2,000.00 fine, in default further R.I. for three months.

(2.) The prosecution case was that on 13-12-75 at about 9 P.M. the Food Inspector had taken a sample of Besan Laddu prepared in vegetable oil from the revisionists shop at Sahjanwa, District Gorakhpur and on analysis by the public analyst vide his report dated 24-1-76 this sample was found adulterated because it contained a prohibited coaltar dye viz. mentanil yellow. The revisionists case was of denial that he was selling away Besan Laddu or that any sample was taken from him. He alleged that his thumb impression had been obtained by the Food Inspector. This defence has been rejected by the courts below and this finding of fact based on cogent material has no infirmity that can be taken notice of at this stage.

(3.) The learned counsel reiterated the two pleas raised before the appellate court. Firstly, the sanction (Ext. Ka-8) was attacked. This sanction on a printed form with the blanks filled in does not show any defect. The mere fact that the blanks have been filled in by some other handwriting and the Chief Medical Officer apparently has only signed the sanction order with a different ink cannot justify the inference that there was no application of mind. Moreover, the Food Inspector has deposed in his evidence that the necessary papers were placed before the C.M.O. and then he had accorded this sanction. The contention has, therefore, no substance.