(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment of the Special Judge, E. C. Act, Thanjavur, dated 12-1-1994 rendered in S. T. C. No. 47 of 1992, convicting the appellant/first accused under Clauses 3 and 4 of Tamilnadu Scheduled Articles (Prescription of Standards) Order, 1977 r/w S. 7 (i) (a) (ii) of the Essential Commodities Act and sentencing him to undergo R. I. for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- and in default to undergo R. I. for four months.
(2.) Short facts that are necessary for the disposal of this appeal are as follows : prosecution had examined P. Ws. 1 to 4, and marked Exs. 1 to 10. P. W. 4 Inspector along with his party, attached to Civil Supplies, C. I. D. , Cuddalore, made an inspection on 27-7-1990 at 12.30 hrs. at the premises of the appellant and second accused situate at No. 6/3, Vellore Housing Board Building, Gundusalai, Cuddalore N. T. , wherein the accused 1 and 2 were found manufacturing adulterated tea. On enquiry, the appellant admitted that he was residing in that premises along with his younger brother the second accused, and they were manufacturing adulterated tea. The Inspector in the presence of the witnesses prepared Ex. P9 observation Mahazar. He found tea in gunny bags, and adulterated tea powder and coffee powder, in a wooden box. He took 600 grams from each gunny bags and wooden box, as sample. He divided it into three portions, put the same in bags and sealed them. Out of six samples, he gave respective sample packets to the appellant. The sample adulterated tea was seized under Ex. P2 Mahazar in the presence of the witnesses P. W. 1 Allimuthu and P. W. 2 Thangamani. The Inspector arrested the first accused/appellant and registered a case in Cr. No. 19/90. Ex. P10 is the first information report. The Inspector arrested the second accused on 30-7-90. The seized contrabands were sent to the Court on 17-8-90 along with a requisition to send the same for chemical analysis. Accordingly the said samples were sent to the Public Analyst, and the Analyst reports Exs. P3 to P8 were received. As per Exs. P4 to P8 Analyst report, the sample tea were found to be adulterated. Hence the Inspector filed the charge-sheet under the abovesaid provisions.
(3.) After the evidence of the prosecution was over, the appellant was questioned under S. 313 of Cr. P. C. and he pleaded innocence.