JUDGMENT

V.K. Jain, J.— This is an appeal filed by the State against the Judgment dated 2nd April, 2004, whereby the respondent was acquitted of the charge under Section 16 of Prevention of Food and Adulteration Act, 1954.

2. On 31st December, 1992, Food Inspector Surender Kumar Sharma purchased, for analysis, a sample of paneer, a food article, from the respondent who was running business under the name and style of M/s Kumar Dairy, 6/33 Moti Nagar, New Delhi. Paneer was found stored in the shop of the respondent for the purpose of sale. The case of the complainant is that the sample of paneer purchased by the Food Inspector, weighing about 750 gms., was cut into small pieces with the help of clean and dry knife in a clean and dry aluminum tray and was mixed with the help of clean and dry steel spoons. The sample was then divided into three equal parts each of which was kept in a separate clean and dry bottle and 20 drops of formalin was added to each bottle. After packing, fastening, marking and sealing the sample as per PFA Act & Rules, signatures of the respondent were obtained on the paper slip and wrapper of the bottle. One counterpart of the sample was sent to Public Analysis, whereas the remaining two samples were deposited with the Local Health Authority. It was reported by the Public Analyst that the sample did not conform to prescribe standard, as the milk fat in paneer was less than the prescribed minimum standard of 50%.

3. On receipt of summons, the respondent appeared before the Trial Court and on his request, the second counterpart of the sample was sent to Director, Central Food Laboratory for analysis. It was reported by Director, Food Laboratory that the sample did not conform the prescribed standard of paneer as the fat contained was below the minimum specified limit of 50%.

4. During trial, the appellant/complainant examined three witnesses.

5. PW-3 Shri S.K. Sharma, Food Inspector stated that on 31st December, 1992, he along with Inspector Rajesh Kumar and other staff of department visited M/s Kumar Dairy, 6/33 Moti Nagar, New Delhi under the supervision of LHA Mr. R.K. Ahuja. The appellant Shiv Shankar was found conducting business there and having stored paneer, butter, milk, etc. for sale for human consumption. He purchased 750 gms paneer which was in the form of a brick lying in the refrigerator. The paneer brick was cut into smallest pieces with the help of a clean and dry knife in a clean and dry aluminum tray. The pieces so cut were properly mixed by a clean and dry spoon, by rotating them in all possible directions, i.e., clockwise, anti-clockwise, upward and downward, many times. The sample was then equally divided into three parts which were put in three clean and dry glass bottles. Twenty drops of formalin were added to each counterpart of the sample, while shaking them for proper dispersion of formalin in each sample. Each counterpart was packed, fastened, marked and sealed as per PFA Act and Rules and slips of Shri R.K. Ahuja bearing his code number and signatures were affixed on each of them. The respondent also signed each counterpart in such a manner that part of his signatures came on the wrapper and the part on LHA slip. On 31st December, 1992, one counterpart of the sample along with Form VII and one Form VII which had been separately sealed, were deposited in the office of Public Analyst vide receipt Ex.PW-3/A. On the same day, two counterparts with two From VII were deposited with LHA vide receipt Ex.PW-1/D under intimation that one counterpart had already been deposited in the office of Public Analyst. All the copies of Form VII were affixed with specimen seal that was used for sealing the sample.

6. PW-1, Shri R.K. Ahuja, is the LHA, who accompanied PW-3 to the place of the respondent. He has fully corroborated the testimony of PW-3. PW-2, FI Rajesh Kumar, is a Food Inspector, who had accompanied PW-1 and PW-3 to the place of respondent on 31st December, 1992. He also has corrobora