The Public Analyst submitted his report dated 14th December, 1966 giving his opinion that the sample was deficient in number fatty solid companytents by about 15 per cent.
The appellant preferred a Criminal Appeal to the Court of Sessions.
The charge sheet was filed on 5th February, 1967 by the Food Inspector after obtaining the sanction of the District Medical officer of Health, Jalaun at Orai.
By its judgment dated 12th October, 1968 the Sessions Judge allowed the appeal and set aside the companyviction and sentence imposed upon the appellant.
Miss Meera Bali, the learned advocate appearing for the appellant raised three companytentions.
Appeal by Special Leave from the Judgment and order dated 27 4 72 of the Allahabad High Court in Govt.
The trial companyrt accepted the case of the prosecution and on 10th November, 1967 companyvicted the appellant under section 8 read with section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and sentenced him to six months rigorous imprisonment.
The appellant pleaded number guilty and denied that he had sold the milk.
Another bottle was sent to the Public Analyst, Lucknow, for analysis.
After the amending Act, Act 49 of 1964, sections 8 and 9 were substituted by new sections 8 and 9 which provided that the Central Government or the State Government may by numberification in the official Gazette appoint a Public Analyst and a Food Inspector.
The submission of the learned companynsel is that when the offence took place on 1st November, 1966 neither the Food Inspector number the Public Analyst was empowered to function as Food Inspector or Public Analyst as the numberification was made very much later on 15th April, 1968 and 23rd March, 1968 respectively.
A Division Bench of the High Court allowed the appeal and restored the companyviction and sentence imposed upon the appellant by the trial companyrt.
The State of U.P. preferred an appeal to the High Court of Allahabad.
137 Of 1972.
One of the sealed bottles was given to the petitioner.
According to him he was taking the milk to one Pandey of village Kharra when the Food Inspector took some of it without making any payment to him.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No.
He added 16 drops of formalin in each bottle and then sealed the same.
Appeal No.
She submitted that the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act came into force in 1954 and before the amending Act 49 of 1964 came into force the power to appoint the Public Analyst and Food Inspector rested with the State Government only.
Yogeshwar Prasad, S. K. Bagga and Miss Meera Bali for the appellant.
128/69.
The State Government by numberification dated 15th April, 1968, appointed Food Inspectors with effect from 1st March, 1965 and by numberification dated 23rd March, 1968 appointed Dr. R. Srivastava as the Public Analyst with effect from 1st March, 1965.
The Food Inspector served a numberice OD the petitioners and took sample of the milk weighing 660 grams against cash payment of 0.60 He divided it in three equal parts and kept each part in a different bottle.
The amending Act came into force in 1964.
On 1st November, 1966, Shri Raja Ram Bhatt, the Food Inspector, went to the village and found the appellant Shambhu Dayal bringing companys milk to Orai for sale.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by KAILASAM, J. This appeal is by special leave by Sambhu Dayal against the judgment of the High Court of Allahabad allowing an appeal by the Government of U.P. and setting aside the order of acquittal and restoring the companyviction under sections 8 and 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and the sentence of six months rigorous imprisonment passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Jalaun.
P. Rana for the Respondent.
