STATE OF H.P. Vs. RAMESH CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE State has challenged the acquittal of the Respondent passed by the Learned Sessions Judge, Bilaspur in Criminal Appeal No. 8 of 1997, decided on 15.7.22002, reversing the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the learned trial Court under Section 16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, in short 'the Act' allegedly for selling non -iodized salt.

(2.) HEARD and gone through the records of both the Courts below.

(3.) ON analysis the contents of the sample was found to contain no iodine. Thus, it was non -iodized common salt, the use and sale of which as an article of food has been banned throughout the State of Himachal Pradesh vide Government Notification No. HFW -BA(V) -7/83, dated 30.8.1983. Therefore, the contents of the sample was opined to be adulterated as per the report of Public Analyst (Ext. P11).