MAHAVIR PRASAD Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been filed by the petitioner against the judgment/order dated 14.6.2002 passed by Addl. Sessions Judge, Shahpura, District Jaipur in Cr. Appeal No. 18/2000, whereby he dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner and affirmed the judgment/order dated 8.9.2000 passed by Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shahpura, District Jaipur in Criminal Case No. 432/1993, whereby he convicted the petitioner for the offence under Section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and sentenced him to undergo 1 year's SI with a fine of Rs. 1000/-; in default of payment of fine, to further undergo 1 month's SI

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the Food Inspector, Shahpura submitted a complaint in the court of ACJM, Jaipur District, Jaipur mentioning therein that on 25.7.1988 at about 4.30 PM he reached at Mohan Lal Mahavir Prasad Kirana store, Shahpura, where accused Mahavir Prasad was selling the goods like Masala, Sugar, Gur, Shakkar, Tea, Chilly Powder etc. On suspicion, complainant Ram Gopal Sharma, Food inspector purchased 600 Gms. Chilly Powder for same analysis for Rs. 16.80 cash and got a receipt of purchase. Form No. 6 was prepared in the presence of witnesses and purchased chilly powder was taken in three clean dry bottles and the bottles were closed and labels were affixed thereon. After completing the necessary formality, he deposited the samples to the chief Medical and Health officer, Jaipur and obtained receipt thereof. As per the Analysis Report of the samples which was received from the office of Chief Medical and Health Officer, Jaipur, the chillies powder was adultrated. Thereafter the complainant obtained the written sanction to prosecute the petitioner. The complainant filed list of witnesses and the list of documents alongwith his complaint. Pre charge evidence was recorded in the case and thereafter charge for the offence under Section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adultration Act, 1954 was framed against the petitioner. The accused petitioner refused to plead guilty and claimed to be tried. The learned trial court fixed the date for the evidence of prosecution witnesses. After taking the evidence for prosecution and examining the accused petitioner, the learned trial court vide judgment dated 8.9.2000 convicted the petitioner for the offence under Section 7/16 of Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and sentenced him, as indicated above. Against the said judgment of the trial court, the petitioner filed a criminal appeal, but the same was dismissed by the appellate court vide judgment/order dated 14.6.2002.

(3.) Against the said judgment passed by the appellate court, this revision petition has been filed by the accused petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the impugned judgments passed by the courts below are patently illegal, unwarranted and contrary to facts on record, as such the same deserve to be quashed and set-aside. He has further contended that both the courts below have committed mistake in considering the untrustworthy evidence against the accused petitioner. He has further contended that there was no evidence that the Chilli Powder found at the shop of petitioner was unfit and harmful for human consumption. The circumstances showing adulteration to be marginable and also possibility of there being an error of judgment in analysis, therefore, the judgments of the courts below are liable to be set-aside. Learned counsel has further contended that occurrence took place on 25.7.1988 and petitioner is facing the trial since the last 27 years. This caused mental agony, which is more than conviction, hence either he should be acquitted or he should be released on probation.