RAM SEWAK Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision preferred under Section 401 of the Code of Criminal procedure (for brevity 'the Code') by the petitioner has been directed against the judgment dated 29-8-1996 in Criminal Appeal No. 4/93, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Umaria, District Shahdol, confirming the judgment of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Umaria, dated 16-1-1993 in criminal Case No. 1352/87.

(2.) IN brief, the case of prosecution is that Food Inspector Shashi bhushan Nigam (P. W. 1) took the sample of rice kanki (broken rice) from the shop of applicant No. 1 who was not present in the shop and the applicant no. 2 was present in whose presence the sample was obtained but he did not issue the receipt of broken rice (kanki) which was purchased by the Food inspector. The Food Inspector obtained the sample on 8-11-1986 and after preparing the 'panchanama' (Ex. P-2) sent the sample to the office of the public Analyst. The public analyst on examining the sample found it to be adulterated. His report is Ex. P-6. On the basis of the report of the pubic analyst holding the sample to be adulterated the prosecution was launched against the applicants. The applicants were charged under Section 7 (i) read with Section 16 (1) (a) (i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (in short 'the act' ). The accused persons abjured their guilt.

(3.) IN order to bring home the charges the prosecution examined as many as four witnesses and placed Ex. P-l to P-13, the documents on record.