JEEVANLAL Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has been convicted under section 16(l)(a) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") and has been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a term of six months and to pay a fine of rupees one thousand, in default, to rigorous imprisonment for a further period of six months, by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jeypore On appeal, the conviction and sentence have .been affirmed by the learned Sessions Judge, Koraput, and hence the revision.

(2.) According to the prosecution case, the petitioner is the owner of a hotel in front of the bus stand at Jeypore town. On 31.10.1978 all 5:00 p.m., the Food Inspector (P.W. 1) visited the hotel premises of the petitioner along with his peon (P.W. 2) and found that milk had been kept for sale near the fire-place and tea and milk were being prepared for the customers. The Food Inspector, therefore, purchased some milk and prepared three samples out of the said milk. He sent one sample to the Public Analyst for analysis and kept one bottle with the petitioner and the I other bottle he carried himself. The Public Analyst gave his report (Ext. 5) stating that the milk was adulterated and there was deficiency of milk fat and milk solid. The Food Inspector, therefore, obtained the necessary sanction and filed the prosecution report Ext. 5/1 is the sanction of the local health authority.

(3.) The plea of the petitioner during trial was that the milk in question was not kept for sale as milk but had been kept there for preparation of tea and coffee. He further pleaded that the milk was not adulterated and P.W. 1 had not given him the price of the milk.