DARSHAN RAM Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this revision petition, Darshan Ram -petitioner assails his conviction under Section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (for short 'the Act'). The learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhatinda, sentenced him to six months rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1,000/ -. On appeal, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhatinda, in his judgment, remarkable both for its exhaustiveness and lucidity, repealling the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioner not only upheld his conviction but confirmed his sentence.

(2.) THE facts giving rise to this petition are very few and simple. On 30.9.1982, Dr. G.S. Bhullar, exercising the powers of a Food Inspector intercepted the petitioner at Bibiwala Chowk, Bhatinda, when he came on a cycle with 20 kgs. of cows' milk contained in a drum, for sale. Dr. Bhullar served notice Ex. PA on the petitioner and purchased 660 mls of milk on payment of Rs. 1.90 againt receipt Ex. PB. After completing the formalities, one of the samples taken out of the milk, was sent to the Public Analyst for analysis who vide his report Ex. PE opined that the sample was deficient of milk solids not fats by 3.5% of minimum prescribed standard.

(3.) THE solitary argument raised with little persistence on 'behalf of the petitioner is that there is no evidence on the record whether the sample of milk was thoroughly stirred and the same was made homogeneous before it was purchased by the Food Inspector. There is no substance in this contention. The stirring of milk has been duly proved from the statement of Shri G.S. Bhullar, the Food Inspector appearing as PW -1. The identical contention was raised before the appellate Court. It has been so adequately and lucidly met by the Additional Sessions Judge in paragraph 8 of the judgment that it would be obviously wasteful and repetitive to cover the same ground over again. Affirming the view of the learned Additional Sessions Judge and agreeing with the view taken by him on a number of authorities cited on the point, I would reject the contention raised on behalf of the petitioners.