STATE OF HARYANA Vs. KRISHAN LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) KRISHAN Lal son of Sadhu Ram respondent herein was charged under section 16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, for allegedly keeping 20 kilograms of adulterated dal chana for public sale. He has earned acquittal vide impugned judgment of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kurukshetra dated 15.9.1992. Hence this appeal by State of Haryana.

(2.) THE allegations against the respondent is that on 9.1.1987, Moti Ram Sharma, Govt. Food Inspector accompanied by Dr. Jitender Kumar visited the shop of the respondent situated near Bus Stand Pipli and found in his possession 20 kilogram dal chana being kept in a gunny bag for public sale. After serving a notice, the Inspector purchased 750 grams dal chana from the respondent after giving him price of the same. Other statutory formalities were also done by the Inspector sealing the sample in the bottles for the purpose of sending them to the Public Analyst and keeping it in Local Health Authority as well. On the receipt of the report from the Public Analyst, the sample was found containing one living weevil, one piece of rodent excreta and one bird dropping. Thereafter complaint was filed against the respondent.

(3.) THE learned trial court has acquitted the respondent mainly on the ground that few grains of kesri dal might have got mixed up at the time of transporting, loading or unloading chana dal and as such it cannot be said that the respondent who was keeping many food grains and other articles at his shop would mix kesri dal with the intention to earn more profits. It has been further observed by the trial court that even otherwise kesri dal could be mixed up in routine by a shopkeeper. It has further been observed by the learned trial court that the specific purpose for which the Food Inspector had visited the shop of the respondent was to take the sample of chana dal and he had not noticed any grain of kesri dal in it insomuch so that even the Public Analyst who examined the sample very carefully has not even observed any grain of kesri dal in it. This fact, according to the learned trial court was enough to show that the respondent was not at all selling any adulterated item for the purpose of public sale. Taking the abovesaid facts collectively, the learned trial court has based the acquittal.