RAM DASS Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Ram Dass appellant was committed to Sessions by the C.J.M. Kheri for standing his trial under S. 7/16 Prevention of Food Adulteration Act 1110 Sessions Judge through his order dated 7-6-77 passed in S.T. No. 52 of 1977, held the appellant guilty under S. 7/16 (1) (a) of the Act and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for one year, and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000. In default of payment of fine he was ordered to undergo R.I. for a further period of one year.

(2.) The facts of the case, which may be taken to be undisputed for the purposes of this appeal, are that there was a country-liquor shop in the town of Mailani in the district of Kheri at the time of occurrence. Liquor at that shop could be sold only by the persons to whom contract was given by the U. P. Government and they too could sell only that liquor which was supplied to them from the Warehouse of the Excise Department of the Government after getting the same prepared by various distilleries. In the year 1975-76 the contractors of that shop, on behalf of the Government, were three persons, namely Sia Ram, Chhotey Lal and Raj Kumar The appellant Ram Dass was the salesman at that shop on behalf of the said contractors. At about 4 p. m. on 30-10-75 Sri A.C Vibhao P. W. 2, who was then Food Inspector of Mailani, went to the aforesaid liquor shop. He had earlier received a complaint that adulterated liquor was being sold upon that shop. Ram Dass appellant was at the shop when the Food Inspector went there. Three sealed bottles of coloured liquor, each of 250 gms., were purchased by A. C. Vibhao from the appellant after giving prescribed notice to him and making payment of the due price of those bottles. The Food Inspector seal ed those bottles in accordance with the rules and handed over one bottle to the appellant. One of the remaining two bottles was sent to the Public Analyst, who opined that the sample was coloured with an un-permitted coal tar dye, namely orange II (colour index No. 15510 of 1956). After the receipt of that report sanction from District Medical Officer of Health was obtained and the appellant was prosecuted. The learned C. J. M., in whose court the complaint was filed, found the case to be a serious one and committed it to Sessions. The appellant pleaded not guilty to the charge framed against him by the learned Sessions Judge. He asserted that the bottles taken from his shop by Food Inspector A. C. Vibhao were brought to his shop from the Government Warehouse of Lakhimpur and those bottles were sold to the Food Inspector in the same condition in which the same were brought from the said warehouse. R. N. Srivastava, Excise Inspector was examined by the appellant in his defence.

(3.) The learned Judge held that it could not be believed that the liquor coloured with un-permitted coal tar dye would be supplied to liquor shops from the State Warehouse and the defence provided by S. 19 (2) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act was not available to the appellant, because he had failed to prove that the bottles purchased from his shop by the Food Inspector were in the same condition in which the same were brought from the warehouse of the State Government. Consequently the learned Sessions Judge convicted and sentenced the appellant as aforesaid.