VISHNU AWATAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE applicant has been convicted under Sections 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act by the 1st Class Magistrate, Bareilly and sentenced to 6 months' R. I. and a fine of Rs. 1,000. Aggrieved thereby an appeal was filed before the Sessions Judge, Bareilly which has been dismissed on 21st November. Hence this revision.

(2.) ACCORDING to the prosecution case Sri V. V. Saxena Food Inspector posted at Bareilly while on checking duty visited the shop of the accused-applicant at about 2-45 P. M. on 22nd December, 1972 at Shahamatganj, Bareilly City. He purchased a sample of 800 Grams of Haldi from the applicant on payment of price for which a receipt Ex. Ka-2 was executed by the accused. Usual formalities were completed by the division of the sample in three parts. One sample phial was sent to the Public Analyst for his report. The Public Analyst found that the sample of Haldi was coloured with Lead Chromate, the use of which is not permitted under the Rules framed under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act After obtaining the requisite sanction the accused applicant was prosecuted and convicted as above.

(3.) THE main point which has been argued by the learned Counsel for the applicant is that the accused had sold the Haldi (turmeric powder) in the same state in which it was purchased by him from a licensed distributor and as such he would be protected under Section 19 (2) (a) (ii) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, The aforesaid section runs as follows: