JAMIL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The matter pertains to an incident which occurred in the year 1994 and the present criminal revision is pending since the year 2005.

(2.) This criminal revision petition under Sec. 397 read with Sec. 401 Cr.P.C. has been preferred against the judgment dtd. 30/8/2005 passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge No. 2, Deeg, District Bharatpur in Criminal Appeal No. 30/2002, whereby, the learned Appellate Court has upheld the judgment of conviction dtd. 15/1/1998 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Deeg, District Bharatpur in Criminal Case No. 135/1996, whereby the revisionist-petitioner was convicted and sentenced under Sec. 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act to six months' rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.1000.00 and in case of default of payment of fine, to further undergo one month imprisonment.

(3.) Brief facts of the case are that the Food Inspector - Shri Shikhar Chand filed a complaint (Exhibit P-10) alleging that during patrolling on 27/10/1994, he stopped one Jamil, who was taking milk on cycle. On inquired about the milk, Jamil told that milk is of buffalo and cow. On suspicion of adulteration, he purchased 750gm milk @ Rs.6.00 in front of witnesses and prepared a receipt, on which, taken signatures of the witnesses but the accused- petitioner denied to give signature. Thereafter, the samples were sent in laboratory for testing. The samples were found to be adulterated in the sample testing report (Exhibit P-8) and Prosecution Sanction (Exhibit P-9) was also taken and thereafter, notice under Sec. 13(2) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (for short "the Act of 1954") was sent to the accused- petitioner through registered post and the complaint was filed. On complaint, cognizance for offence under Sec. 7/16 of the Act of 1954 was taken by learned Magistrate and charges were framed. The accused denied the charges and claimed to be tried. After hearing the parties, the trial Court passed an order dtd. 15/1/1998 convicting and sentencing the petitioner for the offence under Sec. 7/16 of the Act of 1954. The petitioner filed an appeal against the order of the trial Court and but the Appellate Court dismissed appeal of the petitioner vide order dtd. 30/8/2005. Hence, this petition.