KEWAL KRISHAN Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) KEWAL Krishan, petitioner, a milk vendor of Shri Ganganagar, was convicted by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shri Ganganagar, of an offence under Section 16(1)(a) read with Section 7 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, for being found in possession of adulterated cow's milk for sale on 23 -8 -1969, and was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/ - in default of payment of fine to further suffer simple imprisonment for two months. Aggrieved by his conviction and sentence, Kewal Krishan filed an appeal in the court of the Sessions Judge, Shri Ganganagar. The learned Sessions Judge maintained the conviction and the sentence passed against the petitioner by the trial court. As against this judgment of the Sessions Judge, the petitioner has come -up in revision to this Court.

(2.) THE relevant facts giving rise to this revision -petition may be shortly stated as follows On 23.8.1969; Shyam Lal. Food Inspector, purchased 660 M.L. of Cow's milk from the petitioner for 84P. The petitioner was at that time carrying milk on his bicycle. After purchasing the sample, the Food Inspector divided it in to three parts and filled each part in a neat and clean bottle which was duly sealed according to the rules. One of the sealed bottle was delivered to the petitioner and one of the samples was sent to the Public Analyst, Bikaner for analysis. The reprint of the Public Analyst showed that the sample of the cow's milk was adulterated as it was deficient in non -fat solids to the extent of 3.4%. In the opinion of the Public Analyst the sample contained about 40% of added water . The sample was, however, not found deficient in fat cements which were found 9.8% in it. After the report of the Public Analyst was received, the Food Inspector obtained the necessary sanction to prosecute the petitioner from the Administrator, Municipal Council, Sri Ganganagar and made a complaint against the petitioner in the court of the Sub -Divisional Magistrate, Sri Ganganagar, wherefrom the case was transferred to the court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sri Ganganagar upon separation of the Judiciary from the Executive on coming into force of the new Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 The prosecution examined Shyam Lal, Food Inspector, PW. 1, Kashmiri Lal, PW. 2 and Ali Mohammed, PW. 3 to substantiate the charge against the petitioner. The petitioner in his statement under Section 342 Cr.PC denied to have committed the offence. Both the courts below held upon evidence that the prosecution had succeeded in proving the guilt of the petitioner beyond reasonable doubt.

(3.) AS regards the sentence, it has been contended on behalf of the petitioner that in view of the circumstances that the only defect found in the milk in question was that it was deficient in non fat solids to the extent of 3.4% and that the fat -contents were found to be higher than the prescribed standard, the offence committed by the petitioner lost much of its gravity and that a nominal sentence could have served the ends of justice. In support of his above contention, the learned Counsel for the petitioner relied upon a decision of the D.B. of the Court in State v. , wherein it was held that the fact that the milk fat -contents were higher than the prescribed standard, could be taken into consideration as a mitigating factor while awarding sentence to the accused.