BUDH RAM Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BUDH Ram petitioner challenges his conviction under section 16 (1)(a) (i) read with section 7 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, as maintained by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Faridabad, on appeal also the minimum sentence known to law imposed upon him being six month's rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1,000/ -.

(2.) THE prosecution case is that on 5th May, 1979, B.C. Verma Government Food Inspector accompanied by Dr. S.p. Tyage, Deputy chief Medical officer, intercepted the petitioner near the Ocrtoi Post, Hodal and found him carrying about 5 Kgs of cows milk meant for public sale. The usual samples were taken by the Food Inspector and one of those samples was sent to the Public Analyst for analysis. The sample was found to be adulterated. This led to the prosecution of the petitioner and his ultimate conviction and sentence.

(3.) THE only argument levelled with little persistence on behalf of the petitioner is that there is nothing on the record to show that before taking the sample of milk contained in the container, it was properly stirred either by the Food Inspector or his associate. The Courts below, however, accepted milk in the container had been made homogenous and ruled out the defence plea that the milk was not stirred before the sample was taken. There appears to be merit in this contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner. On this point the Food Inspector has no doubt stated in the trial court purchased but in the complain filed by him in the trial Court it is nowhere mentioned that the milk was made homogeneous or that it was stirred by the Food Inspector himself. It is well known that the cream accumulates on the top of the milk and if the milk is not properly stirred when the sample is taken, it is bound to be deficient in essential ingredients. For this reason, there is no escaping the conclusion that the sample must have been taken by the Food Inspector without stirring milk in the container and without making it homogenous. In this view of the matter, the prosecution has failed to establish the guilt of the petitioner beyond reasonable doubt. the result, therefore is that the rcvision petition is accepted and the conviction and sentence of the petitioner are set aside and he is acquitted of the charge. The fine, if realised, shall be refunded to the petitioner. Petition allowed