K.S. HEGDE, J.

(1) TWO contentions advanced in this appeal by special leave are (1) that the appeal filed by the Municipal Board, Saharanpur, before the High court of Allahabad-under Section 417 (3) of the Criminal Procedure Code was not maintainable in law and (2) the accused could not have been convicted on the strength of the certificate of the Public Analyst annexed to the complaint. The High court rejected both those contentions.

(2) THE material facts relating to this appeal are these : The accused in this case is the proprietor of Khalsa Tea Stall situated in court Road, Saharanpur. Among other things, he was selling coloured sweets. On suspi- cion that the sweets sold by him were adulterated, the Food Inspector, Muni- cipal Board, Saharanpur, purchased from the accused for examination some coloured sweets under a Yaddasht on 31/05/1963, and sent a portion of the same to the Public Analyst of the government of U. P. for examination. The Public Analyst submitted his report on 24/06/1963. It reads :

"SEE Rule 7(3)

REPORT BY THE PUBLIC ANALYST

REPORT No. 11652.

I hereby certify that-I, Dr. R.S. Srivastava, Public Analyst for Uttar Pradesh, duly appoin