HAZARI LAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has been convicted under section 7/16 P.E Act and sentenced to six months' rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000.00 by the courts below.

(2.) The prosecution case is that on 26.12.80, the Food Inspector demanded 'Deshi Ghee' for taking samples, but he was provided/sold 'Vanaspati Ghee' as such, the petitioner was guilty of misbranding an article of food. It is not disputed before me that the 'Ghee' sold by the petitioner fulfilled the prescribed standard of 'Vanaspati Ghee' and it was not adulterated. The charge against the petitioner was of mis-branding. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate held the petitioner guilty of mis-branding on the ground that F.s. 11.20 were charged as price of 450 Grams of Ghee and the rate of 'Vanaspati Ghee' was much lesser than 'Deshi Ghee'. This finding was confirmed by the lower appellant court.

(3.) Normally, this Court does not interfere with a finding of fact while exercising revisional jurisdiction. However, in the instant case, after hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and going through the record as well as the judgments under challenge, I find that the approach of the learned courts below in apprechating the evidence is not proper. As stated, the finding of mis-branding was recorded on the ground that Rs. 11.20 were paid by the Food Inspector as price of 450 Grams of 'Ghee' and so much could not have been as the price of 'Vanaspati Ghee'.