LAL CHAND Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner accused namely Lal Chand son of Matu Ram, resident of village Mandhana, tehsil Bawani Khera, District Bhiwani has been tried in a complaint under Section 16 (l) (a) (i) read with Section 7 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 by the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, bhiwani. He was convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000, in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for two months.

(2.) AGGRIEVED against the same, the petitioner filed an appeal. The Appellate Court below upheld his conviction but reduced the sentence from one year to six months.

(3.) BRIEFLY stated that the case of the prosecution is that Megh Nath, Government food Inspector on 14. 10. 1991 at 5. 15 p. m. at Jatwala Chowk found the accused petitioner in possession of seven packets of iodized salt for sale. The petitioner was having the salt lying in a wooden rack in his shop. Case of the prosecution is that 600 grams of iodized salt was purchased and three samples were drawn. The Public Analyst, Haryana, Karnal, found that the salt is free from Iodine whereas it was mandatory that salt would contain 15 PPM of Iodine at distribution channel including retail level. The sample gave sodium chloride on dry wt. basis 87. 11% and matter soluble in water other than Sodium chloride on dry wt. basis 12. 11% against the minimum and maximum prescribed standard of 96. 0% and 3% respectively.