Judgment

R. S. SARKARIA, J.:- We have heard the learned counsel on both sides. The trial court convicted the appellant under Section 7/16 (1) (a) (i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and sentenced him to six months rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1,000 on a charge that he sold 450 grams of Dalchini for Rs. 2.25 to the Food Inspector, R. S. Kushwaha. The samples taken were sent to the Public Analyst for analysis. The Public Analyst performed only microscopic test and opined that the sample examined by him was not cinnamon at all but contained cent per cent foreign bark.

2. As before the courts below, here also the contention advanced on behalf of the defence is that the article was not sold as cinnamon zeaylanicum knees but as Chini Dalchini or cassia lignea which, it is common ground between the counsel, is not cinnamon. We find basis for this contention in the telling circumstance that the appellant charged Rs. 2.25 only for 450 grams of this article from the Food Inspector; while the market price of Dalchini properly so-called, would have been more than ten times of the price charged by the appellant. The meagre price charged is a pointer to the fact that the arti