LALLAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LALLAN, convict-appellant, has preferred this appeal against the judgment and order of Shri Bhagwant Prasad, IVth Additional Sessions Judge, Azamearh dated 2-12-1978 convicting and sentencing the appellant in State v. LALLAN, Sessions Trial No. 295 of 1976 under section 16 (1) (a-i) read with section 7 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) to six months rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1000/-. In default of payment of fine to further three months rigorous imprisonment.

(2.) THE prosecution case is that on 6-12-1975 at 3.45 P. M. Pyare Lal, Sanitary Supervisor PW 1, Shri Nath Sahai, Food Inspector PW 2, of Lalganj area checked the shop of Lallan appellant. He ran a grocery shop and dealt in oil, spices, rice, pulses, biscuits, lemon-choos and other such materials. Sri Nath Sahai, Food Inspector PW 2 purchased from the appellant samples of various articles including lemon-choos, which is the subject matter of the present case. This he had done after formally introducing himself to the appellant and expressing his desire to purchase the necessary samples for submitting for analysis to the Public Analyst. Sample of 600 grams of lemon- choos was purchased on payment of Rs. 3-60, about which receipt Ext. Ka-I was prepared. THE notice in Form No. VI, Ext. Ka-II was served on the appellant. Both these documents were signed by the appellant. All this was done in the presence of a number of persons who had assembled there at that time. However, none had agreed to sign the documents as a witness. THE sample of the lemon-choos was divided in three equal parts and sealed in three phials. One of the said phials was handed over to the appellant. All this was evidenced in the memo Ext. Ka-III which was signed by the appellant. One of the samples was sent to the Public Analyst, who submitted Ms report dated 5-1-1976 which was received by the District Medical Officer (Health) Azamgarh on 15-1-1976 per endorsement on the said report whereby he directed the Food Inspector, Lalganj to launch prosecution atonce. According to his report the sample of lemon-choos in question was coloured with three un-permitted coal tar dyes, namely, Auramine, Bhodamine Band Malachite Green (C. I. No. 41000, 45170 and 42000 respectively of 1956). In this way the sample was adulterated.

(3.) THE appellant pleaded that he never sold the lemon-choos at his shop and he did not sell the alleged sample of lemon-choos to the Food Inspector, as alleged by the prosecution. He denied his signatures on all the documents produced by the prosecution. Of course he admitted that the said Food Inspector had taken the samples of Mirch and oil on that day from his shop and had obtained his signatures on many blank un-written papers. He examined Ram Sukh DW 1 in his defence. He deposed that the appellant never sold lemon-choos at his shop. In cross-examination he stated that at the alleged time the shop of the appellant was surrounded by a few officers and a number of public persons. A sort of panik spread in the Bazar and shop keepers started running away after closing their shops. However, the appellant was detained at his shop by the said officers and public men. He then stated that the public officers under threat had made the appellant to sign a number of blank papers. He also admitted that samples of Mirch and oil were taken from the appellant's shop.