RAMCHANDRA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application in revision by Ramchandar against his conviction wider section 16 (1) (a) read with Rules 49 and SO of the Prevention of Food adulteration Act. He has been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for one month and a fine of Rs. 300.

(2.) THE case by the prosecution against the petitioner was that he was running a hotel named as 'azad Hind Hotel' on Nai Sarak Churu and was carrying on the business of selling bread, cooked meat and vegetables etc. without a licence. Further on 6th October, 1968 when Shri Mangilal, Food Inspector checked the hotel, there was neither any notice board, nor were the utensils enamelled nor was there any glass almirah for protection from sand and flies, Kneaded flour was lying since morning and had fermented. Sugansingh servant in the hotel was found working there at that time and he informed the Food Inspector that ramchandar petitioner was one of the owners oi the hotel, Mangilal prepared a memo of inspection and after obtaining sanction for the prosecution of the petitioner from the Administrator Municipal Board Churu Shri S. K. Tak, filed a complaint in the court of the same gentleman who also happened to be the Sub-Divisional Magistrate in Churn. Along with the petitioner three more persons namely Sugansingh, Madanlal and Mst. Ghewari were prosecuted. Four witnesses were exatinned on behalf of the prosecution to prove that the petitioner was the owner of the hotel which was being run without a licence and that the above mentioned contravention of the rules framed under the Act were noticed by the food Inspector.

(3.) THE petitioner denied the allegations and stated that he was not the owner of the hotel and had been falsely implicated by Shri Mangilal Food Inspector with whom he was on inimical terms. He stated that Shri Mangilal had also filed a case of theft against him.