PURAN LAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE prosecution case in brief is that on 22nd June 1989 at about 3.00 p.m. the business premises of the accused were inspected by Food Inspector Daya Kishan who was accompanied by Dr. J.M Gandhi. It was a tea shop situated opposite bus stand, Palwal. At the time of inspection of the premises, 7 litres of mixed milk was found lying in an aluminium container at the shop. It was meant for sale to the public. It was boiled milk. Food Inspector disclosed his intention to the accused to seize sample of milk from him with a view to have the same analysed from the Public Analyst, Haryana. He gave him notice on Form No. VI. He purchased 750 mls. of mixed milk from him on payment of Rs. 6/- to him vide receipt exhibit PB. Before the sample milk was purchased, he had thoroughly stirred the milk and made it homogeneous and uniform. Food Inspector divided the milk so purchased in three equal parts. He put each part in a separate, dry and clean bottle. He added two drops of formalin in each bottle as preservative. He then stoppered each of the bottles tightly and then sealed them. Bottles were labelled and wrapped in strong thick paper with gum. A paper slip bearing the code number and signatures of the Local Health Authority was pasted on each bottle from top to bottom. Each bottle was secured by means of strong twine and sealed with the seal of Medical Officer and Food Inspector at the spot. Thumb impression of Puran Lal, accused, was obtained in a manner that part of the thumb impression of the accused remained on the paper slip and part on the wrapper of the bottle.

(2.) ONE sealed bottle along with a memorandum in Form VII was sent to the Public Analyst, Haryana, for analysis in a sealed packet through Railway Parcel. The other two sealed bottles of sample along with two copies of memo in Form VII were deposited with the Local Health Authority on 23.6.89 in a sealed package. Copy of the memorandum in Form VII and specimen impression of the seal used in sealing the sample and the packet were sent separately to the Public Analyst, Haryana, through registered post. At the time when sample was drawn, one N.K. Jindal was also present.

(3.) ON the conclusion of the trial, Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Palwal, found the charge under Section 16(1)(a)(i) read with Section 7 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, proved against the accused vide order dated 21st April, 1997. Vide order dated 22.4.97, he sentenced the accused to undergo R.I. for 6 months and to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/-. In default of payment of fine, to undergo further R.I. for 1 months.