GIAN CHAND Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner Gian Chand was convicted for the offence under Sec. 16(1) (a)(i) read with Sec. 7 of the Food Adulteration Act by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nahan, vide his judgment dated 22-6-1982. Later the learned Magistrate after hearing the petitioner on the question of quantum of sentence, sentenced him to undergo for rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000.00. The petitioner filed an appeal against the order of his conviction and sentence in the Court of Sessions Judge. The Sessions Judge vide his order dated 10th Sept., 1982, dismissed the appeal, maintaining both the conviction and sentence as recorded against the petitioner by the trial court.

(2.) The petitioner has now approached this Court in revision to seek quashing of his conviction and sentence.

(3.) The facts of this case show that the petitioner does not deal in milk. He runs only a tea-stall and keeps milk at his stall for that purpose only. The Food Inspector purchased a sample of milk from the petitioner for the purposes of analysis on 25-4-l98l. At that time the milk was described as 'mila-jula'. While sending the sample of milk for public Analyst, the Food Inspector described the same as 'mixed milk'. The term 'mixed milk' was defined in the provisions of the Food Adulteration Rules for the first time in Jan., 1979 when item No. A.11.01.05-A was inserted in such Rules by G.5.R. 55 (E), dated 31st Jan., 1979 published in the Gazette of India, (Extraordinary) Part-II, Sec. 3(i) dated 3lst Jan., 1979, This item reads :