LAWS(ALL)-1985-4-36

NAGAR SWASTHYA ADHIKARI Vs. ASHARFI LAL YADAV

Decided On April 11, 1985
NAGAR SWASTHYA ADHIKARI, NAGAR MAHAPALIKA Appellant
V/S
ASHARFI LAL YADAV Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal filed on behalf of the Nagar Swasthya Adhikari, Nagar Mahapalika, Allahabad under section 378 (4) CrPC, is directed against the judgment and order dated 25-4-1938 passed by Sri K. P. Mathur, Special Judicial Magistrate, Allahabad whereby he has acquitted Asharfi Lal Yadav, accused-respondent of the charge under section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (hereinafter referred to as Act).

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that on 19-12-1975 at 1.30 P. M., at Allahpur Matiara Road, Allahabad, Tulsi Ram Dubey PW 1, Food Inspector, Nagar Mahapalika, Allahabad disclosed his identity to the accused and told him that he would take sample of the mills for analysis. After giving notice to the accused in from VI, the Food Inspector took 660 ml., of milk on payment of its price. The Food Inspector has further stated in his cross- examination that he did not purchase 660 ml. milk in one bulk, but he first took 500 ml. then 100 ml. and thereafter 60 ml. approximately. Thereafter he filled the whole 660 ml. milk thus purchased from the accused-respondent in three phials equally after mixing formaline. It is not noted in form VI as to what was the class of the milk purchased as sample. The Public Analyst tested and reported treating it as buffalo milk. On analysis, the Public Analyst found fatty contents 2.6% and non-fatty solids were found 9.9%. Thus there was a deficit of 57% in fatty contents.

(3.) FROM the above statement, it is quite clear that the Food Inspector first took 500 ml. milk then 100 ml. and thereafter 60 ml. milk, as there was no pot from which he could measure 660 ml. milk in one bulk, therefore, he took 500 ml. and 100 ml. milk from Napna and 60 ml. milk from his estimate. He mixed the whole 660 ml. milk -and thereafter mixed formaline. Then he divided the sample in 3 equal parts and filled the milk in 3 phials as required by law. Thus there was no contravention of Section 11(1) (b) of the Act. It is not the requirement of Sec. 11 (1) (b) that all the milk should be purchased in one bulk. The only requirement is that the sample milk should be filled in three phials in equal quantity. That has been done in this case.