JAI SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is directed against judgment dated 10.3.1998 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hisar, affirming the judgment and order dated 23.12.1995/2.1.1996, passed by the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Fatehabad, vide which present accused-petitioner was convicted under Section 16(1) (a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (for short 'Food Act'). Learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate had sentenced the accused to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and fine of Rs.3000/-, in default thereof, undergo simple imprisonment for six months, which was reduced by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hisar to rigorous imprisonment for one year, while the fine was maintained.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that on 25.5.1990 at about 3.30 pm, Teja Singh, Government Food Inspector accompanied by Dr.N.K.Ahuja, Deputy CMO Hisar, inspected Rajput Soda Water Factory. The petitioner Jai Singh, who was reported to be servant of his brother Bhupinder Singh, was found in possession of 50 bottles of zeera sweetened carbonated water contained in crate for public sale. After issuing the prescribed notice, nine bottles of zeera sweetened carbonated water total measuring 1.8 litres were sealed. After stirring and mixing the contents of the bottles and making it uniform, the contents were divided into three equal parts. These were put into three empty, dry and clean bottles, which were duly sealed as per procedure. One of the bottles was sent to the Public Analyst, who reported that the sample was free from sugar, whereas it should have contained alteast 5% sugar. On the receipt of the report, the Food Inspector instituted a complaint. After recording the evidence of the prosecution and recording the plea of the accused, allowing to lead defence evidence, the learned Magistrate heard both the parties and convicted and sentenced the accused Jai Singh whereas his brother Bhupinder Singh was acquitted.

(3.) In appeal, the fine was maintained, whereas sentence was reduced to rigorous imprisonment for one year. Still not satisfied, accused Jai Singh has come in the present revision.