NATHUSINGH Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this petition, the petitioner Nathusingh seeks interference of this Court with the judgment of the Fourth Additional Sessions Judge, Ujjain in Criminal Appeal No. 51 of 1979. affirming the judgment of the Municipal Judicial Magistrate First Class. Ujjain in Criminal Trial No. 1727 of 1977 finding the accused -petitioner guilty of selling adulterated buffalo milk prohibited under section 7 (1) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (hereinafter called the Act) add sentencing him to rigorous imprisonment for six months with Rs. 1000/ - fine and in the alternative further rigorous imprisonment for three months under section 16 (1) (a) (i) of the Act.

(2.) ON 13 -5 -1977 at about 7 a.m. Satyanarayan Gupta (PW 1). the Food Inspector in the Municipal Corporation, Ujjain in the presence of David (PW 2) and one Ambaram stopped the petitioner on Engineering College Road within the limits of the Corporation and bought for him 660 ml. of buffalo milk for Rs. 1.50 so that it could be later on analysed by a Public Analyst. The petitioner passed the receipt (Ex. P. 5) in this regard. Satyanarayan Gupta (PW 1) divided this bought milk in three equal parts filling each of them in three separate clean and dried bottles and poured 18 drops of formalin in each of them. They were sealed. Necessary memoranda were prepared, One of the sealed bottles was sent to the Public Analyst and the Public Analyst vide his report contained in the document (Ex. P.10) found that buffalo milk was below standard, it being deficient both in the contents of milk fat and milk solids non fat, they being respectively 4.7 per cent and 8. 6 per cent (as against 5 per cent and 9 per cent) showing deficiency of 0.3 and 0.4 per cent respectively. On these facts when charged with and tried for selling adulterated buffalo milk prohibited under section 7(1) and made punishable under section 16 (1) (a) (i) of the Act, the petitioner denied his guilt, In the defence, it was suggested that the milk sold was not buffalo mille and it was contended that there had been no compliance with - the provisions contained in sections (2) of the Act, The learned Magistrate finding the case against the petitioner provide beyond reasonable doubt, convicted and sentenced him as aforesaid, The petitioner's appeal failed.

(3.) THE second and final contention, however, is that there was no compliance with the provisions contained in section 13(2) of the Act. Section 13(2) of the Act lays down as follows : -