MAYA PRAKASH Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is against an order dated 24/04/1984, passed by 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Hardoi in Criminal Appeal No. 18 of 1983, dismissing the appeal and maintaining the conviction and sentence of the petitioner under Sections 7/16 of Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 for rigorous imprisonment of six months and fine of Rupees 1000/- and in default of payment of fine further rigorous imprisonment of one month. Petitioner was prosecuted on the allegations that on 19/06/1980 Food Inspector C. P. Dwivedi after disclosing his identity to the petitioner, purchased Vanaspati Ghee of Suhagin Brand, out of which he took a sample of the Ghee in accordance with the procedure and on receipt of report of Chemical Examiner, which confirmed that the sample of Ghee was deficient in the prescribed limit of vitamin-A, he filed complaint against the petitioner. The petitioner was convicted and sentenced as aforesaid by the Judicial Magistrate, Sandila on 0 7/01/1983. The appeal preferred by the petitioner against the said order was also dismissed.

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioner Sri Mahesh Chandra and learned Government Advocate have been heard at length.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner has raised two legal contentions, firstly that the trial of the petitioner stood vitiated on account of imperfect sanction for his prosecution and secondly that in view of amendment of the prescribed standard of contents of Vitamin-A in Vanaspati Ghee, the petitioner could not have been convicted for the offence under the charge against him.