BISHAMBHAR DAS Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order will govern both Cr. Revision No. 1402 of 1967 and Cr.Misc. Case No. 4397 of 1968, Cr. Revision No. 1402 of 1967 has been filed against the conviction of the applicant under Sec. 7 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), whereas Cr. Misc. Case No. 4397 of 1968 arises out of an application in the aforesaid revision for permission to add certain grounds in the memo of revision. In the view which I have taken in regard to the merits of Cr. Revision No. 1402 of 1967, learned counsel for the applicant has not pressed Cr. Misc. Case No. 4397 of 1968.

(2.) Having heard learned counsel for the parties I have come to the conclusion that the conviction of the applicant, which is the subject-matter of Cr. Revision No. 1402 of 1967, must be set aside and the applicant must be acquitted.

(3.) The prosecution case was that on March 14, 1966, P.N. Agnihotri, a Food Inspector, inspected the sweetmeat shop of the applicant situate in Puranpur town in the district of Pilibhit, that he purchased some sweet Papri made of Besan and Maida from the applicant who was exposing it for sale at the shop and that a sample there of having been sent to the Public Analyst it was found to have been coloured by Acramine, a colouring matter not permitted by the rules framed under the Act. After the necessary sanction the applicant was tried and found guilty by a I Class Magistrate who sentenced the applicant to six months' R.I. and fine in a sum of Rs. 1,000.00 in default further R.I. for six months. An appeal to the Sessions Judge having failed, the applicant filed the revision before me.