ASHOK KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition is directed against the order of Additional Sessions Judge, Karnal dated May 7, 1985, whereby the order of conviction and sentence passed against the present revision petitioner under section 16 (1) (a) (i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, was maintained.

(2.) IN brief facts of the case are that Shri Kali Ram, Government Food Inspector inspected the premises of the revision petitioner known as 'Ashoka Grinding Mills', Kunjpura Road, Karnal, in the presence of Dr. J.S. Sohi and L.K. Sharma 7 Kgs. of powdered chilies were found to be in possession of the revision petitioner which were meant for public sale. After disclosing his identity the Food Inspector purchased 600 grams of powdered chilies on payment of Rs. 12/- and revision petitioner issued a receipt in respect thereof. The powdered chilies so purchased were divided into three equal parts and the same were transferred in three dry and clean bottles which were stopped, labelled and scaled. One of the sample bottles alongwith memo in form VII was sent to the Public Analyst for analysis in a sealed cover whereas, the other two sample bottles wore deposited with the Local Health Authority. Report of the Public Analyst Ex. PD, dated March 30, 1982, was received whereby, the said sample was found to be adulterated, in as much as it had ash insoluble in dilute Hcl 1.58% against the maximum prescribed standard of 1.3%, and grit 1.14%. The Local Health Authority also sent one copy of the report of the Public Analyst to the revision petitioner by registered post giving him intimation that if he so desired he could get the second sample examined from the Director, Central Food Laboratory, Ghaziabad, within a period of ten days of its receipt. Thereafter, prosecution was launched against the revision petitioner on 5-5-1982.

(3.) THE accused in his statement under section 313 Cr.P.C. denied the allegations appearing in evidence against him and pleaded that the powdered chilies from which the sample was taken was not meant for sale. The sample was taken under threat and that he does not indulge in sale of powdered chillies. He further stated that he only had engaged himself in grinding work for which he had obtained a licence. In his defence Ram Chand was examined as DW 1.