STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. SATPAL SOGA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 4-6-1996 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Kangra at Dharamsala, whereby the conviction of and sentence awarded to the accused by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class (II), Nurpur, under S. 16(1)(a)(i), read with S. 7(i) and S. 2(ia)(a)(c) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') has been set aside.

(2.) Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that B. S. Sidhu (CW-1), Food Inspector, Chamba on 12-3-1991 purchased sample of Atta for analysis from the business premises of the respondent-accused (hereinafter referred to as 'the accused'). The sample so purchased was dealt with in accordance with law and on analysis of the sample, the Public Analyst opined that the sample did not conform to the prescribed standards. On application of the accused, one of the sample parts kept in the office of the Local Health Authority was sent to the Director, Central Food Laboratory who also found that the sample did not conform to the standards laid down for Atta under the provisions of the Act and the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules'). The accused was, thus, tried by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class on the accusations that he had committed an offence punishable under S. 16(I)(a)(i), read with S. 7(i) and S. 2(ia)(a)(c) of the Act and was finally convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine in the sum of Rs. 2000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month.

(3.) Feeling aggrieved, the accused preferred an appeal which was heard by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge (I), Kangra at Dharamsala who, by the impugned judgment, acquitted the accused of the accusations against him. Hence the present appeal.