RAM Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision has been filed by the applicant against his conviction under Section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (hereinafter called the Act) and the sentence of six months' rigorous imprisonment awarded to him.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution, in brief, was that the accused was selling sweets at his shop. The Food Inspector (hereinafter called the Inspector) found that the 'laddus' which the accused was selling were coloured. He asked the accused to give him a sample of 'laddus' for being examined Toy the Public Analyst, but the vendor refused. When the Inspector advanced to take the Laddus for sample he was threatened. The Inspector thereafter prepared a memorandum to the effect that the vendor had refused to sell Laddus to him. He then kept waiting for ten or fifteen minutes. The vendor thereafter closed his shop and went away. A complaint was lodged on these facts and the vendor was put to trial for preventing the Food Inspector from taking the sample of food.

(3.) THE prosecution examined1 the Food Inspector and one Balwant who had signed the memorandum prepared by the Inspector. The trial court believed the prosecution version and convicted the accused and sentenced him as mentioned above. Appeal filed by the accused was dismissed. He has now come up in revision to this Court.