BABU SHER MOHD NAYTA Vs. STATE OF MP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two criminal revisions have been directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by JMFC, ujjain and confirmed by Additional Sessions Judge, Khachrod. As the same questions of law and facts are involved in these two revisions, therefore, they are decided by this common order. This original order be kept in Cr. R. No. 106/2006 and the copy of the same be kept on the record of Cr. R. No. 109/2006.

(2.) FACTS of the case in Cr. R. No. 106/2006 which are necessary for disposal of this revision are that on 21-9-1981 at about 7. 00 a. m. Food inspector, Chandra Shekhar Sharma, Municipal Corporation, Ujjain intercepted the applicant, who was carrying milk in a can on a cycle for selling. Food Inspector purchased sample of 660 ml. of milk from him for the purpose of analysis and paid cost of the same. The sample was divided equally, after making it homogeneous and was sealed in three empty and dry bottles, after adding 18 drops of preservative formalin in each of the bottles. One bottle of sample was sent for chemical examination to the public analyst, Ujjain. On analysis as per the report of public analyst 4. 4% fat and 8% solids not fat were not found in the sample and as the sample was not in conformity with the standard prescribed for the milk, therefore, it was found adulterated. Copy of the report of public analyst was sent by registered post to the applicant and thereafter, complaint was filed before learned Magistrate. Learned Magistrate during trial recorded plea of the present applicant and then proceeded for trial. After trial applicant was found guilty for the offence punishable under section 7 (1) read with section 16 (l) (a) (i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and has been sentenced for rigorous imprisonment for three months and fine of Rs. 1,000/ -. He preferred Cr. A. No. 181/05 against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence. Appeal was dismissed by Additional Sessions Judge, khachrod vide judgment dated 31-1-2006, hence the present revision petition has been filed challenging the finding of guilt and order of conviction and sentence.

(3.) FACTS of Cr. R. No. 109/2006 which are necessary for disposal of this revision are that on 15-10-1987 at about 7. 00 a. m. applicant Babu s/o sher Mohd. was intercepted by Food Inspector, Satyanarayan Gupta, municipal Corporation, Ujjain, while he was carrying mixed milk of cow and she buffalo in a can on a cycle. 750 ml. of milk was purchased by the food Inspector, after paying its cost for the purpose of analysis and was divided in three parts. After making it homogeneous, it was sealed in three separate empty and dry bottles. One of such bottle was sent for analysis to the public analyst, Ujjain, who on analysis found that the sample was found containing 4. 5% fat and 8% solid not fat and, therefore, it was found adulterated. Report of the public analyst was sent to the applicant by registered post and then a complaint was filed before JMFC, Ujjain, who after trial found applicant guilty for the offence punishable under section 7 (1) read with section 16 (1) (a) (i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration act and sentenced him with rigorous imprisonment for three months and fine of Rs. 1,000/ -. Cr. A. No. 182/05 preferred against this judgment was dismissed by Additional Sessions Judge, Ujjain vide judgment dated 31-1-2006, hence the present revision petition has been preferred to challenge the finding of guilt and order of sentence.