BHOORA Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant has been convicted under Sec. 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and sentenced to six months' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1000.00. His conviction and sentence has been maintained in appeal by the Sessions Judge, Fatehgarh. Hence this revision.

(2.) I have heard learned counsel for the applicant and also for the State. It is not necessary for me to go into the facts of the case. According to the prosecution case, the Food Inspector had purchased a sample of mixed goat and cow milk from the applicant. It contained one part of goat milk and two parts of buffalo milk. The report of the Public Analyst disclosed that the sample was adulterated. It was deficient in fat contents by about 19% and non-fatty solids by about 40%.

(3.) Learned counsel has pointed out that on the date when the offence was alleged to have been committed, viz. 10th Aug., 1973, no standard was laid down for mixed milk. The standard of mixed milk was prescribed by the Notification No. GSR-205 dated 13-2-1974 and became effective from 24th May, 1974. He has, therefore, argued that when the standard of mixed milk was not in existence on that date, no offence was committed by him. In support of this submission, he relied upon a decision of this court in the case of Ajad Ahmad Vs. State, 1978(11) FAC 297. Learned counsel for the State was unable to advance any argument in rebuttal of this submission. In my opinion, the argument is well founded and if must be accepted. This revision application is accordingly allowed. The conviction of the applicant for the offence under Sec. 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and the sentence imposed thereunder are set aside. The applicant is on bail. He need not surrender. The bail bonds are hereby discharged. Conviction set aside.