Judgment

O. CHINNAPPA REDDY, J.:- On November 1, 1969, a sample of gingelly oil was purchased by the Food Inspector, Madurai Municipality from the shop of the first respondent, who is now reported to be dead and against whom, this appeal has, therefore, abated. At that time respondent No. 2 was attending to the business. After completing the necessary formalities the Food Inspector arranged to send one part of the sample to the Public Analyst at Madras for analysis. The sample was analysed by the Public Analyst on November 11, 1969 and it was reported by him that it contained 5.1% of Free Fatty Acid as against the limit of 3.0 per cent permissible under Clause A.17.11 of Appendix B to the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules 1955. In his report he also mentioned that the sample was properly sealed, it was air-and-moisture-tight and packed in thick paper so as to be proof against light, and, the Free Fatty Acid content of the oil would, therefore, remain unchanged for several months. On receipt of the Public Analysts report a complaint was filed against the two respondents for an offence under Section 16 (1) (a) and Section 7 (i) read with S. 2 (i) (1) and Cl. A.17.11 of Appendix B