SAT NARAIN Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a Criminal Revision filed by one Sat Narain against the order dated November 19, 1998 of Additional Sessions Judge, Hisar whereby he dismissed his appeal against the order of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Hisar convicting him under Section 16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/- or in default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months.

(2.) THE prosecution case, in brief, is that on May 26, 1990, Government Food Inspector was present near double crossing Hisar in connection with seizing of samples of food stuff from their vendors. At that time, Dr. S.K. Naval, Medical Officer was also present. Sat Narain (accused) came with a drum containing 20 kilograms of cow milk which was for sale to the public. Shri Teja Singh disclosed his intention to seize sample of milk from him with a view to get the same analysed from Public Analyst, Haryana. He manifested this intention to the accused through notice Exhibit PA. Thereafter he purchased 250 mls. of milk from him on payment of Rs. 3/-. The accused gave him receipt Exhibit PB. The Government Food Inspector divided that milk into three equal parts. He put each of those parts in three dry, clean and employ bottles. He put two drops of fomalin of 40% strength in 25 mls of milk in each of the bottles. The bottles were stoppered tightly and sealed with the seal of Dr. S.K. Naval. Bottles were lebelled and wrapped in strong thick paper, the ends of which were pasted with gum. Paper slip bearing the code number and the signatures of local health authorities was wrapped on each bottle from top to bottom. Bottles were sealed with the seal of Food Inspector and the seal of Dr. S.K. Naval. Signatures of the accused were obtained on the bottles in a manner that half of the signatures appeared on the paper slip and half on the wrapper of the bottles. One sealed bottle alongwith memo on form VII in a sealed packet was sent to the Public Analyst, Haryana, Chandigarh for analysis. One copy of the memo on form VII bearing seal impression of the seal used was sent to the Public Analyst through post separately. Two sealed bottles alongwith two copies of memos on form VII bearing seal impression were deposited in a sealed packed with the local Health Authority Hisar for analysis. The Public Analyst found the sample adulterated inasmuch as it was found deficient in milk fat and in milk solids not fat to the extent of 19% of the standards of purity in cow milk as laid down in the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is no evidence that before milk was purchased, the same was properly stirred and homogenized. Shri Teja Singh, Government Food Inspector and Dr. S.K. Naval have stated that milk was properly stirred and homogenized before the same was taken. Even otherwise, if milk had not been properly stirred and homogenized, milk not would have been deficient both in milk fat contents and milk solids not fat content. It would have been deficient only in milk solids not fat content. In this case, milk was found deficient both in fat content and in milk solids not fat content. Deficiency in both the constituents of milk cannot be attributed to absence of stirring of milk and making it homogeneous.