KHEM CHAND Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner Khem Chand son of Mangat Ram, a shopkeeper at Sohna Adda Chowk, Gurgaon faced trial before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gurgaon on a charge under Section 16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954. He was found guilty of the charge, convicted thereunder and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-. He was further ordered to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months in default of the payment of fine. The order of conviction was passed on 5.10.1985. Feeling aggrieved against the order of conviction and sentence, the petitioner appealed before the Sessions Judge, which was ultimately heard by the Additional Sessions Judge (I), Gurgaon, who by his order dated 25.9.1986 dismissed the appeal and affirmed the order of conviction and sentence recorded by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gurgaon. Hence this revisional application.

(2.) THE facts of this case, in short, are that on 17.12.1981 at about 11.20 A.M. Food Inspector H.R. Khanna accompanied by Dr. B.S. Dahiya, Deputy Chief Medical Officer visited the shop of the petitioner Khem Chand, Kiryana Dealer, Sohna Adda Chowk, Gurgaon and found in possession of about 5 Kgs. of Chillies ground exposed for sale. The Food Inspector demanded a sample of Chillies ground by giving him notice in writing and purchased 600 grams of Chillies ground for analysis from the accused for a sum of Rs. 9/-. After usual formalities being observed, the sample was sent for chemical analysis. On examination, the said sample was found to be adulterated. The Food Inspector filed a complaint in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gurgaon on 5.2.1982. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gurgaon ordered issuance of notice to the accused for 3.3.1982. The petitioner appeared in the Court on 18.2.1982. The petitioner and on the same day filed an application under Section 13(2) of the Act for sending the second part of the sample to the Director, Central Food Laboratory, Ghaziabad for re-analysis. The Director, Central Food Laboratory submitted report dated 25.3.1982 to the Chief Judicial Magistrate with observation that the sample did not conform to the standard of chillies powder. The trial proceeded and both the Food Inspector and the Deputy Chief Medical Officer were examined in Court. The prosecution gave up Mansa Ram, another witness of the seizure, as having been won over by the accused. On conclusion of the trial, learned Chief Judicial Magistrate convicted and sentenced the accused petitioner vide his judgment and order dated 5.10.1985. As noticed earlier, the petitioner's appeal did not meet with any success.

(3.) FROM the perusal of the judgment of the trial Court as that of the appellate Court, it appears that all these grounds were taken before these Courts, but all the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioner accused were negatived by both the Courts below on the basis of several judicial pronouncements. The first appellate Court, it appears, has elaborately discussed all the points raised on behalf of the petitioner accused and quite justifiably rejected all the contentions. I find nothing to disagree with the findings of the Courts below. The learned lawyer appearing for the petitioner accused has not urged any other new ground in support of the revision. It is evident that the case has been properly decided and no interference with the findings of the Courts below seems necessary. Resultantly, the order of conviction need be sustained.