RAM CHANDER Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant, namely, Ram Chander, has filed this revision against the judgment dated 30.01.2003, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fatehabad, vide which the petitioner was convicted under Section 16 (1) (a) (i) read with Section 7 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter called the PFA Act) and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- or in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 1 1/2 months.

(2.) The brief facts of the case in hand are that, on 31.05.1991, Teja Singh, Government Food Inspector (hereinafter referred to as GFI) inspected the premises of the accused/appellant at Subzi Mandi, Fatehabad. The accused was having 40 bottles of sweetened carbonated water in his factory. GFI disclosed his identity and desired to purchase 9 bottles of sweetened carbonated water from him on payment of necessary price for the purpose of analysis. He served notice Ex.PA, upon the accused to this effect which was signed by the accused/appellant. Dr. Mohar Singh, S.M.O, Civil Hospital, Fatehabad, had also accompanied GFI at that time. GFI purchased 9 bottles of sweetened carbonated water vide receipt Ex.PB for a sum of Rs.6.75 ps, from the accused. Thereafter, the contents of the abovesaid 9 bottles were put in a dry and clean jug. After mixing the whole contents properly. GFI divided the sweetened carbonated water into three equal parts and put it into three dry and clean bottles. The bottles were stoppered, securely fastened and then wrapped in strong thick paper which was secured by means of paper strips bearing code number and twine. The bottles were sealed. On sealed sample was sent to the Public Analyst, Haryana, Chandigarh and other sealed bottles were handed over to Local Health Authority. One copy of memorandum and specimen impression of seal was sent to the Public Analyst, Chandigarh separately through registered post. GFI also prepared the spot memo Ex.PC which was attested by Dr. Mohar Singh. The sample was analysed by the Public Analyst, Haryana, Chandigarh and vide his report Ex.PF, he opined that the sample was free from sugar whereas it should have contained at least 5.0% and that it gave saccharine 172 PPM against the maximum prescribed standard of 100 PPM.

(3.) After the receipt of the report of the Public Analyst, Sh. Teja Singh, GFI instituted the present complaint.