JAIPAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision arises out of the judgment and order dated 4 -5-1978 passed by II Additional Sessions Judge, Aligarh affirming the conviction recorded against him by the trial court under Section 7 read with Section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act.

(2.) ON 28th of August, 1976, at about 8.45 a.m., the food inspector, Aligarh, collected sample out of the milk in possession of the applicant when the latter was carrying it for sale. ONe part of the sample was sent for analysis which was reported to be adulterated. A complaint was, therefore, filed for the prosecution of the applicant. The defence set up by the applicant was that the milk was not meant for sale and that, he did not receive the price thereof from the food inspector. The trial court, accepted the prosecution case and, convicting the applicant under Section 7 read with Section 16 of the Act, sentenced him to six months' R.I. and a fine of Rs. 1000/-. Aggrieved against his conviction and sentence, the applicant filed an appeal in the court of Sessions. Learned Additional Sessions Judge, who heard the appeal, affirmed the conviction recorded against the applicant but reduced the sentence of imprisonment to three months' R.I. and a fine of Rs. 500/-. Dissatisfied with it, the applicant has preferred this revision.

(3.) NO other contention having been raised, I find that this revision is devoid of substance and must fail.