STATE OF HARYANA Vs. OM PRAKASH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SAMPLE of Zeera obtained by Government Food Inspector from the respondent around 12.11 p.m. on November 23, 1985 was found to contain 16 living meal worms and thereby adulterated. On being prosecuted for it under section 16(1)(a)(i) read with Section 7 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, the accused pleaded 'not guilt' to charge framed against him in this regard and claimed to be tried. Vide it impugned judgment dated November4, 1986, learned trial court acquitted the accused. Feeling aggrieved therefrom, the state of Haryana has filed Criminal Appeal No. 431-DBA of 1987 in this Court.

(2.) WE have heard Shri D.S. Bishnoi, DAG, Haryana for the appellant State, Sarvshri Sudharshan Goel and Raghbir Chaudhary, Advocates for the respondent accused and have pursued the entire relevant material on record very carefully.

(3.) IT has authoritatively been held in State v. Puran Mal, 1985(2) Recent Criminal Report 52 : AIR 1985 Supreme Court 41, that it is not possible to hold that a worm and an insect are the same. In M/s Narkeklange Roller Flour Mills and another v. The Corporation of Calcutta, 1973 Food Adulteration Cases (Calcutta) 257, the difference between insect and worm was noted as under :-