JES RAJ Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -This revision has been preferred by accused petitioner Jes Raj under the following circumstances:-

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the conviction should not be maintained in this case because firstly, the sanction given by Local Authority which is Ex.R 10 has been given without applying mind particularly because the case of the petitioner was that he had gone to the shop in order to clean the shop and sample was taken from the container which was being heated in order to prepare the ghee. His second contention is that the learned Magistrate did not put questions regarding the report of the public analyst when the petitioner was examined under Sec. 313 Cr.PC. and the petitioner has been greatly prejudiced Therefore, his contention is that this revision should be allowed and the petitioner should be acquitted.

(3.) On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor has controverted these arguments and has tried to support the judgments of the courts below. So far as sanction, Ex.R 10, is concerned, I find that it does bear the signatures of the Local Health Authority but the sanction is in a printed form in which blank columns have been filled. It does mention the name of the petitioner as well as his address in the hand writing of somebody else other than the Local Health Authority.