Crl. Revision No. 2005 of 2005 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Revision No. 2005 of 2005 Date of Decision: October 25, 2010 Rajesh Kumar ........Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ........Respondent ****** CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: None for the petitioner. Mr. Satyavir Singh Yadav, DAG, Haryana. SABINA, J. The petitioner was convicted for an offence under Section 7(v) read with Section 16(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (in short 'the Act') by Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Pehowa vide judgment dated 19.10.2004. Vide order dated 20.10.2004, the petitioner was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- under Section 7(v) read with Section 16 (i) of the Act. Aggrieved by the same, petitioner preferred an appeal and the same was dismissed by Additional Sessions Judge, Kurukshetra vide judgment dated 13.10.2005. Hence, the present revision petition. The prosecution story in brief as noticed by the trial Court in para 1 of the impugned judgment reads as under :- “ In brief, it is the version of complainant that on 10.1.1995, about 2.15. p.m. Sh. K.R. Dhandey, Government Food Crl. Revision No. 2005 of 2005 2 Inspector, Pehowa alongwith Dr. S.K. Nagpal inspected the karyana shop of accused at Ambala road, Pehowa and the accused was found having about 15 kilograms of 'Chane-Ki- Dal' contained in gunny-bag' that the 'Dal' was for public sale; that the sample of 'Dal' was purchased by the Government Food Inspector to the tune of 600 Grams for a consideration of Rs. 8.40 and sample was divided into three dry, clean and empty bottles; that the bottles were stoppred tightly and sealed with the seal of Medical officer as per the rules made under the Act; that one sealed bottle alongwith a memorandum in form VII was sent to the public Analyst Haryana, Chandigarh for analysis; that the report of public Analyst Ex.PE indicated that the sample of Chana-Dal was adulterated; that the accused had applied for sending the second part of the sample to Director Central Food Laboratory Pune Ex.PG also indicated that the moisture was 27.1% and thus, the sample did not conform to the standards of chana-dal as per PFA Rules, 1955. After launching the prosecution, accused was summoned and the case was ordered to be tried as a warrant trial case.” None has appeared on behalf of the petitioner. On the last date also none had appeared on behalf of the petitioner. I have gone through the record of the case with the able assistance of the learned State counsel. In the persent case, the shop of the petitioner was inspected by P.W.1 Kali Ram and P.W. 3 Dr. S.K. Nagpal on 10.1.1995 at about 2.15 p.m. Petitioner was having 15 kg channa dal in a gunny bag in his Crl. Revision No. 2005 of 2005 3 possession for sale. 600 gms of channa dal was purchased by P.W.1 against payment of Rs.8.40/-. The recovered dal was equally put in three dry, clean and empty bottles. The bottles were packed tightly and sealed with the seal of P.W.3 Dr. S.K. Nagpal. As per the report of the Chemical Examiner, Ex.PE, the sample contained weevilled grains to the extent of 8 % against the maximum prescribed standard of 3%. The official witnesses were acting in discharge of their official duties and had no reason to falsely involve the petitioner in this case. The learned trial Court after appreciating the evidence led by the prosecution on record has rightly convicted the petitioner under Section 7(v) read with Section 16 (i) of the Act and the said judgment has been rightly upheld by the Appellate Court. No ground for interference is made out. Dismissed. (SABINA) October 25, 2010 JUDGE Anand