ANANT KUMAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application in revision by Anant Kumar against the Judgment and order dated 30.5.1981 of Sri Y.S. Raizada, Additional Session Judge, Kanpur, by means of which he confirmed the conviction and sentence of the applicant under Sec. 7 read with Sec. 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act as imposed on him by Sri S.K.I. Naqvi, Metropolitan Magistrate (Corporation), Kanpur.

(2.) A detailed narration of facts involved in this case will not be necessary and it is suffice to say that 600 grams of Arher pulse was taken from the applicant on 30.10.1979 at about 9-00 a.m. This sample was divided into three parts and was sealed in the presence of Shyam Narain Tewari, a public witness. One of those was sent to the Public Analyst and it was found that the percentage of inorganic matter in it was 4.3 per cent by weight, which was in excess of the maximum permissible limit of 1 percent. This sample was, therefore, found adulterated. The applicant was, therefore, prosecuted and has been convicted as aforesaid.

(3.) The first point raised in this revision was that in this case there was breach of Sec. 10 (7) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act because at least one independent public witness should have been examined to say the sample was properly taken, but no such witness was examined. The record, however, shows that when the sample was taken Shyam Narain Tewari was one such witness. The witness was, therefore, taken and this is all that is required by Sec. 10 (7) of the said Act and whether he was examined or not did not matter.