DAITARI MAHTO Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was convicted Under Section 16 (1) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, hereinafter referred to as the Act, and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for six months. On appeal, his Conviction and sentence have bean upheld by the Additional Sessions Judge, Singhbhum.

(2.) The prosecution case is that the Food Inspector (P.W. 2) of the District Board of Singhbhum visited the shop of the petitioner on the 7th November 1963 along with Hari Ear Bhattaoharya (P.W. l), Mata Karwa (P.W. 3) and one Abhay (not examined), purchased one and a half pao of gunja oil from the petitioner on payment of price, divided it into three equal parts, pat them in three separate bottles and, after affixing labels thereof, properly packed and sealed them. One of the bottles was given to the petitioner and one was sent to the Public Analyst, who, in his report, found the sample of gunja oil highly adulterated with linseed oil.

(3.) The prosecution of the petitioner was started on the basis of a complaint (Ext. 7) made by P.W. 2 after obtaining the necessary sanction as required by Section 20 of the Act,