RAMESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision application under Section 397/401 of CrPC has been filed by the applicant against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 20.08.1999 passed by learned Second Additional Sessions Judge, Raisen dismissing the criminal appeal No.6/1999 and thereby affirming the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 20.01.1999 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Raisen in Criminal Case No.461/1990 convicting the applicant under Section 16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (in short "Act of 1954") and thereby sentencing him to suffer imprisonment of six months RI and fine of Rs.1000/ - and in default of payment of fine, further RI of 2 months.

(2.) NO exhaustive statements of fact are required to be narrated for the purpose of disposal of this revision application since in elaboration they have been mentioned in the impugned judgment. Suffice it to say that on 07.06.1990 the Food Inspector Shri D.K. Khare (hereinafter shall be referred to as "Food Inspector") took the sample of 750 gms of Besan Ka Laddu (Magaj Ka Laddu) after purchasing the same. The sample was separated into three parts equally, meaning thereby keeping 250 gms of Laddu in each packet of polythene which were wrapped by thick paper and were sealed. The sample was sent to the State Food Laboratory which was received by the said Laboratory on 08.06.1990. The Public Analyst found the food sample to be adulterated vide its report dated 13.07.1990. The report was sent to the Office of Local Health Authority on 16.07.1990. The notice under Section 13(2) of the Act of 1954 was sent by the Food Inspector to the applicant on 30.08.1990.

(3.) LEARNED Chief Judicial Magistrate on 20.06.1995 found the offence to be proved and eventually vide judgment dated 20.06.1995 convicted the applicant under Section 7(1) read with Section 16 (1)(a)(i) of the Act of 1954, however, in appeal before learned First Additional Sessions Judge Raisen (Criminal Appeal No.70/1996), the judgment was set aside and the matter was remanded to Trial Court by giving certain directions to examine the witnesses again. Eventually, the witnesses were re -examined. Thereafter, learned Chief Judicial Magistrate vide impugned judgment dated 20.01.1999 again held that applicant has committed the offence under Section 16 (1)(a)(i) of the Act of 1954 and passed the order of sentence to suffer six months RI and fine of Rs.1,000/ - with default stipulations. In the appeal filed by the applicant, the judgment of conviction and order of sentence was affirmed.