( 1 ) THIS it an appeal against an acquittal of the respondent who was tried for offenceg of adulteration under section 7 read with sec. 2 (l) (a) andlo (la) (i) of the PREVENTION OF FOOD ADULTERATION ACT, 1954. The respondent was acquisted by the lower court on the sole ground that the Food Inspector failed to supply a copy of the report of the Public Analyst as required under Rule 9 (j) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules. It is provided under that rule that it shall be the duty of the Food Inspector to send by Registered post, a copy of the report received in Form No. III from the Public Ana- lysit to the person from whom the sample was taken within ten days of the receipt of the said report if the report is against the person. However, the report shows that the sample conforms to the provisions of the Act or Rules made thereunder, it is enough if the person is informed of the same in which case no report need be sent. Here the report of the Public Analyst is that the groundnut oil sent for analysis contained 7% of Castor Oil Therefore it was adulterated. Admittedly when the report of the Public Analyst was received by the Food Inspector even prior to 19 6-