OM PARKASH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) OM Parkash petitioner has been convicted under Section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (for short the, Act) and sentenced to six months rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1000/- by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rohtak. In default of payment of fine, he has been awarded three months rigorous imprisonment further. In appeal, his conviction and sentence have been maintained by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rohtak. Hence this revision.

(2.) ACCORDING to the prosecution case, a sample of separate milk which the petitioner was having in the premises inside the General Bus Stand, Rohtak, was purchased by the Food Inspector in accordance with the procedure prescribed by law. One of the samples was sent for analysis to the Public Analyst. His report disclosed that it contained 5% milk fat and 9.4% solids not fat. The milk fat was thus found 4.5% in excess of the maximum prescribed standard of 0.5%. On the complaint filed by the Government Food Inspector, the petitioner has been prosecuted and convicted as above.

(3.) MR . H.N. Mehtani, appearing for the petitioner, has raised the identical arguments which were earlier urged before the appellate Court and which have been elaborately dealt with. To my mind, it would be totally wasteful to tread the same ground over again. It suffices to mention that I would endorse in toto the reasoning and the findings of the appellate Court.