HARI RAM Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision is directed against the judgment dated 7.3.1998 passed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Faridabad whereby he dismissed the appeal preferred against the judgment/order of sentence dated 19.2.1996 rendered by the Court of learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Palwal vide which he convicted and sentenced Hari Ram accused to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default of payment of the same to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one and a half months under Section 16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food and Adulteration Act 54 (for short, 'the Act').

(2.) SHORTLY put, facts of the prosecution case are that the accused was in possession of 70 kg of wheat atta contained in a gunny bag for public sale. On 8.2.1991, the Food Inspector accompanied by Dr. G.M. Mittal took the sample of wheat atta from the possession of the accused. On analysis, the same was found adulterated and unfit for human consumption due to the presence of four living, one dead weevil and three living meal worms. After observing usual formalities, the complaint was lodged in the Court for trial of the accused. The accused was charged under Section 7 of the Act punishable under Section 16(1)(a)(i) ibid to which he did not plead guilty and claimed trial. To bring home guilt against the accused, the prosecution examined PW1 Dr. G.L. Shukla, PW2 Dr. J.C. Mittal, PW3 Daya Kishan and closed its evidence.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties, besides perusing the record with due care and circumspection.