(1.) This criminal revision by Achhairbar Prasad son of Ganesh resident of Mohalla Nai Bazar Basti Police Station Kotwali, District Basti is directed against the judgment and order passed by IVth Additional Sessions Judge, Basti in Criminal Appeal No. 103 of 1983, dated 22-3-83, arising out of Criminal Case No. 4080(7), under Section 7/16 of Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (here-in-after referred to as the Act), thereby confirming the applicant's conviction and sentence of six months R.I.and a fine of Rs. 1,000.00 or in default of payment of fine, further to undergo R.I.for two months.
(2.) Brief facts giving rise to the present revision are as follows :- On 25-10-1975 at about 5 P.M.Rudra Prasad Srivastava, P.W.1, Food Inspector, Mobile Squad, Gorakhpur Division, Gorakhpur, inspected the shop of the applicant in Naya Bazar, Basti. After disclosing his identity, he purchased 300 gms. of Heeng from the applicant on payment of Rs. 21.00 as its price. He suspected the Heeng to be adulterated so he purchased the aforesaid quantity of Heeng for analysis. The notice Ext. Ka 1 was served upon the applicant stating therein that the sample was being purchased for analysis. Receipt Ext. Ka. 2 was also obtained from the applicant in token of payment of Rs. 21.00 having been paid as the price of Heeng so purchased. The Heeng was devided into three equal parts and put in three separate clean bottles, which were duly sealed. One of the sealed bottles was given to the applicant vide memo Ext. Ka. 3. The other sample bottle along with copy of the memorandum Ext. Ka 4 was sent to the public Analyst, through registered post. As per report of the Public Analyst dated 10-12-1975, Ext. Ka 6, the sample was found to be adulterated as it contained 30.24% starch, which exceeded the maximum permissible limit of 1%. A copy of the report of the Public Analyst along with letter dated 30-12-75, Ext. Ka. 5, was also sent to the applicant through registered post. The Food Inspector prepared the complaint and submitted the papers for sanction to the Local Health Authority. After obtaining the sanction, Ext. Ka. 8 for prosecution of the applicant, a complaint was filed in the Court. The applicant was tried under Section 7/16 of the Act. He pleaded not guilty to the charges. He also denied the allegations including the purchase of the sample of Heeng from him. It was pleaded that he was falsely implicated in the case due to misunderstanding. No evidence in defence was examined.
(3.) In support of his case, the complainant besides himself coming in the witness box as P.W.1, examined Markandey P.W.2.