VIJAY KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision is directed against the judgment dated April 9, 1996 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sirsa whereby the conciction and sentence of the petitioner for an offence under section 16(1)(a)(i) read with Section 7 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (for short the Act) recorded by the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Dabwali vide his judgment/order dated February 20, 1991 has been confirmed. The petitioner has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 1200/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo imprisonment for two months.

(2.) THE facts necessary for the disposal of this petition are that on 6.10.1985, Food Inspector purchased a sample of cow's milk curd from the petitioner who was found to be in possession of 3 kilograms of such curd meant for sale, in accordance with the provisions of the Act and rules made thereunder. On an analysis of the sample, the same was found to contain milk fat 0.7 per cent and milk solids not fat 10.8 per cent and accordingly the milk fat was found to be 82.5 per cent deficient of the minimum prescribed standard. After completing the necessary formalities under the Act read with rules thereunder, a complaint was filed against the petitioner on 4.12.1985.

(3.) IN support of its case, prosecution examined two witnesses i.e. O.P. Kalra, Food Inspector (PW.1) and Doctor M.R. Bishnoi (PW.2). In his examination under section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioner denied all the allegations of the petitioner and pleaded false implication. In his defence, the petitioner examined Bahadur Chand (DW.1) who was given up by the prosecution as having been won over, who deposed that no sample was taken from the petitioner by the Government Food Inspector in his presence.