MOTUMAL Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision-petition is directed against confirming judgment of IV Addl. Sessions Judge, Raipur dated 31-3-1993 in Cr. Appeal No. 51/90 confirming the conviction and sentence passed by the Court of C.J.M., Raipur in Cr. Case No. 389/83 vide judgment dated 3-3-1990. The petitioner has been sentenced to R.I. for one year and fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default of fine R.I. for 3 months.

(2.) The petitioner was found guilty of offence of selling adulterated peppermint to food inspector PW 1 S.B. Mishra on 8-9-1982. The purchased peppermint was divided in 3 parts and one was sent to the public analyst. The public analyst found sulphated ash 2% and ash insoluble in dil. HCL 0.5% and reported that the sample did not confirm to the standard but no standard was mentioned in the report.

(3.) The trial court found that this accused had sold the sample and sampling was in accordance with law. The report of the public analyst proved beyond doubt that the sample did not confirm to the standard and that opportunity under S. 13(2) of the P.F.A. Act has been given to the accused in accordance with law but the accused avoided it to take notice sent to him under Section 2 of the Act. Nothing was said about sanction to prosecute him under Section 20 of the Act or absence of it by the prescribed authority i.e. health officer.