PITABASA BISI Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Sub divisional Judicial Magistrate, Balangir, under section 16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (in short, 'the Act') and affirmed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Balangir, is under challenge in the present revision.

(2.) The prosecution case, briefly stated, is that on 19-5-1989 the Food Inspector, P.W. 1 purchased 750 ml. of milk from the accused, a hawker and after properly stirring to make it homogeneous divided into three equal parts, put each part in clean and dry bottle after adding 20 drops of formal in as preservative to each bottle and sent one bottle to the Public Analyst for examination and deposited the remaining two with Local Health Authority. On receipt of the report from the Analyst that the milk was adulterated, P.W. 1 submitted all the relevant papers to the Chief District Medical Officer, who on being satisfied accorded sanction, whereupon the accused was prosecuted. In compliance with the requirement of law, a copy of Analysts report was sent to the accused to enable him to exercise his right under section 13(2) of the Act.

(3.) Since accused denied the accusation, the learned Magistrate proceeded with the trial in course of which prosecution examined witnesses and brought relevant documents, viz., notice to the accused for purchase of sample, memorandum of impression of seal, postal receipt, Analysts report, etc. into evidence. The defence also examined some witnesses in order to prove that the pot of milk which the accused was carrying on the date of incident belonged to one Prabhas Sai and that the same was not meant for sale for human consumption. The learned Magistrate on assessment of evidence believed the prosecution version and consequently convicted the accused and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of. Rs. 1,000/-, in default to undergo further imprisonment for one month. In appeal, trial courts judgment was affirmed.