THE STATE Vs. PRAKASH AMRUTLAL SHAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is by the State for enhancement of sentence.

(2.) The Respondent-accused has been convicted under section 7(i) read with section 16(l)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 and the Appellate Court instead of six months rigorous imprisonment imposed by the trial court, has awarded a sentence till the rising of the court and confirmed the sentence of fine of Rs. 2000.00 or in default further rigorous imprisonment for one month.

(3.) The facts lie in a narrow set of events, in that Wal Dal was taken in purchase by the Food Inspector Balkrishna Mahajani (P.W. 1) on June 18, 1974 from the shop of the accused and proper steps were taken to divide the same and sent one of the samples as required for analysis. Mahajani received Exh. 26 the report of the Public Analyst, stating that Dal was not upto the standard as it contained damaged grain more than 5%. The prescription in this regard is available in Appendix B Paragraph 18.06 requiring that damaged grain shall not exceed 5% by weight, in the food grains so sold. The Appellate Court has held that in view of the standard prescribed the adulterated article is covered by the definition available in clause (1) of section 2 and not by clause (f). Applying the same and taking into account the age as well the accused was the first offender and was subjected to fine, the appellate court sentenced the accused to imprisonment till rising of court along with fine of Rs. 2,000.00.