DINESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision petition has been filed to challenge the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the trial Court as well as by the lower Appellate Court.

(2.) Briefly the facts of the prosecution story are that on 24.11.2005, the accused petitioner was found in possession of 35 liters of cow milk contained in three drums which was for public sale. Food Inspector Mahavir Singh-PW 1 took sample by purchasing on payment and the same was sent for analysis. The milk purchased by Food Inspector was divided into three equal parts in bottles which were sealed with the seal of Medical Officer Dr. Rajinder Rai-PW 4. The samples were then sent to Public Analyst Haryana, Chandigarh for analysis in a sealed packet. As per report of Public Analyst Haryana, the sample was found to be adulterated as the milk fat was found to be 8.04% against the prescribed limited of 8.5%. Accordingly, the complaint was instituted in the Court and the accused was summoned. After recording pre-charge evidence, the accused was charged under Section 7 read with Section 16(1)(a) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (here-in-after referred to as 'the Act') to which the petitioner pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

(3.) On recording of statement and on appreciation of evidence, the petitioner was convicted and sentenced by the trial Court vide judgment dated 22.07.2010 for offence punishable under Section 7 of the Act and was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months and a fine of Rs. 1,000/- with default clause.