V. BHASKARA RAO, J.

( 1 ) THIS revision is filed against the conviction of the petitioner under section 16 (1-A) and 7 read with 2 (i-a) (m) of Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and sentence to six months R. I. and a fine of Rs. 1,000. 00. The facts of the case are, that P. W. 1 the Food Inspector, Eluru, visited the shop of the petitioner and found 9 gingili oil tins of 15 kgs. each, and took a sample having purchased 375 grams of gingili oil for Rs. 7-10 ps. under a receipt. He served Form No. VI on the petitioner informing him that he took samples for the purpose of analysis; he divided the said gingili oil into three parts and filled the said parts in three clean, dry and empty bottles and sealed the said bottles according to the procedure prescribed under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and Rules and sent one such bottle to the Public Analyst for analysis, and that the Public Analyst after analysis opined that the sample sent to him is not conforming to Butyrorofractometer reading, Iodine value and Saponification value, and is therefore, adulterated. So, a complaint was filed by the Food Inspector. The prosecution examined P. Ws. 1 and 2 i. e. the Food Inspector and a

Click Here to Read the rest of this document