R K GUPTA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Revisionist, Ram Krishna Gupta has filed this revision against the judgment and order dated 30.11.1984 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 54/1984 dismissing the appeal and confirming the judgment and order dated 21.3.1984 passed by Special Judicial Magistrate (Economic Offence), Gorakhpur in Case No. 598/82 (State Vs. Ram Krishna Gupta) under Section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (hereinafter referred to as ''the Act').

(2.) Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and learned A.G.A.

(3.) Brief facts of the case are that on 31.12.1980 at about 10:00 a.m. Sri A.N. Tripathi, Food Inspector inspected the shop of the revisionist, Ram Krishna Gupta in Siktaur, P.S. Khorabar, District- Gorakhpur. At the shop food-grains, edible oils and spices including coriander (Dhania) were displayed for sale and revisionist, Ram Krishna Gupta was also present. Food Inspector purchased 450gms of Dhania and paid Rs. 3.60/- to the revisionist, Ram Krishna Gupta in presence of Rikhai. Food Inspector also prepared a receipt but revisionist refused to sign it. Food Inspector, thereafter, gave a notice in form no. 6 to the revisionist informing that the sample had been purchased for analysis. Sample was divided in three equal parts and filled in three bottles, which were properly sealed and code slip was pasted on it. Memo was also prepared at the spot. Revisionist refused to sign the notice in form no. 6, the sealed sample and the memo. One phial of the sample along with copy of memorandum in form no. 7 was sent by the Food Inspector through registered post to the Public Analyst. The remaining two phials were deposited in the office of the Local Health Authority. Another copy of memo in form no. 7 along with sample of the seal was separately sent to the Public Analyst. It appears that the aforesaid sample sent to the Public Analyst, Lucknow was damaged in the transit therefore, through letter dated 13.12.1981 he asked for the other phial from the Local Health Authority, which was sent on 6.5.1981. According to the report of the Public Analyst dated 11.6.1981 the sample was found to be adulterated, as the insects damaged portion was 10.5%, which was more than maximum prescribed limit of 5% and there were also dead and alive insects in it. After considering the documents the Local Health Authority gave sanction for the prosecution of the revisionist. Thereafter the complaint was filed in the court.