THE STATE Vs. RAJARAM HARI PATIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by the State challenging the order of acquittal recorded by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Kagal, in Criminal Case No. 412 of 1974 will have to be dismissed and the order of acquittal will have to be confirmed though on a ground different from the one on which it was based by the learned trial Magistrate.

(2.) Prosecution is under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. The accused was met by the Food Inspector at Kagal on the outskirts of the city when the accused was coming on a bicycle with two pitchers containing milk. According to the Food Inspector 660 ml. of milk were purchased from the accused and ⅓ of the quantity so purchased was sent to the Public Analyst who reported that the milk contained 45.5% added water and was thus adulterated within the meaning of section 2(i)(c) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954.

(3.) On these facts the accused was put up for trial before the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Kagal. In support of its case the prosecution examined not only the Food Inspector but also the panchas accompanying him at the time of the purchase of the milk. From the evidence on record the learned trial Magistrate came to the conclusion that the Food Inspector could not have purchased 660 ml. of milk but must have purchased only 500 ml. of milk from the accused. In so holding the learned trial Magistrate noticed the statement made by one of the panchas that the measure carried by the accused himself was used for taking the sample by the Food Inspector. That measure was of 500 ml. Relying upon the case of Rajaldas Pamnani Vs. State of Maharashtra, 1975 (I) FAC I , the learned trial Magistrate held that the quantity that can thus be sent by the Food Inspector was not in compliance with the requirements of R.I. 22. So holding he acquitted the accused of the offence with which he was charged.