RAM LAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) For being found on the 6th of April, 1971, in possession of 2 kilograms of substandard cow's milk for sale, Ram Lal aged 42 years, a shop keeper of Malerkotla, who is the petitioner before me, was convicted on the 13th of December, 1971, by Shri Sarwan Singh Chahal, Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Dhuri of an offence under Section 6(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration act and was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for six months and a fine of Rs. 1,000/- the sentence in default of payment of fine being rigorous imprisonment for three months. His appeal was dismissed by Shri Harbans Singh Ahluwalia, Additional Sessions Judge, Sangur, on the 23rd of September, 1972, and that is why he has come up in revision to this Court.

(2.) The percentages of milk fat and non-fatty solders in the sample of milk purchased from the petitioner by Rup Singh Food Inspector, Municipal Committee, Malerkotla (P.W.1) in the presence of Kirpal Chand (P.W.2) were found by the Public Analyst to be 3.5 and 13.5 respectively. In other words, the fat content of the milk was lower by 0.5% than the prescribed minimum.

(3.) The only contention raised on behalf of th petitioner is that the deficiency in the fat content of the milk was only marginal and that the petitioner was therefore entitled to the benefit of doubt. Support for the contention is sought from Malwa Co-operative Milk Union Limited v. Behari Lal, Criminal Appeal Nos. 235-236 of 1964, decided by the Supreme Court on the 14th of August, 1957; Municipal Committee Amritsar v. Karam Singh,1971 PunLR 846; Nanak Singh v. State,1973 CLR 65; Balwant Singh v. The State of Punjab,1973 CLR 96. In Malwa Co-operative Milk Union Limited v. Behari Lal , two samples of milk were in dispute. On of them was deficient by 0.1 per cent and the other by 0.4 per cent in non-fatty solids while their fat contents were higher than the prescribed minimum. Their Lordships refused to set aside the acquittals of the accused for the reason that they considered the deficiencies in the two samples to be marginal. They observed :