Non-compliance of the requirements of Rules 18 and 7 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules is a fatal defect in the prosecution case.

1. The petitioner has been convicted under Sec.16(1)(a) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, for having sold or stored for sale adulterated black pepper (Kali Mirch). The trial Court had sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for nine months and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000, or, in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months more but, in appeal, the sentence has been reduced to rigorous imprisonment for three months and a fine of Rs. 500, or, in default, rigorous imprisonment for one month more.

2. It appears that, on the 31st January, 1963, the Health Officer of Motihari Municipality (P.W. 1) purchased a sample of black pepper from the grocery shop of the petitioner situated in Mohalla Meena Bazar; and, after observing the requisite formalities, he forwarded one packet of the article in sealed cover to the Public Analyst at Patna. The report of the Public Analyst was to the effect that the sample of the black pepper was adulterated. Accordingly, with the sanction of the Chairman of the Municipality, the present prosecution was instituted against the petitioner.

3. The petitioner put forward a defence that he had been falsely implicated by the Health Officer (P.W. 1), who was inimically disposed towards him and who had really not taken the sample of black pepper from his shop.

4. The defence was negatived by both the Courts below. The Courts below have accepted the prosecution case and have convicted the petitioner in the manner already indicated.

5. Two contentions were put forward on behalf of the petitioner in this Court. The first contention of the learned Counsel is that there is no evidence in this case at all to the effect that rule 18 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules (hereinafter referred to as the "Rules") was complied with by the Health Officer (P.W. 1) and/or that the Public Analyst had performed the duty joined upon him under sub-rule (1) of R.7 of the Rules. To appreciate the contention of the learned Counsel, the relevant rules may be quoted. Rule 18 is in the following terms :-

"18. Memorandum and impression of seal to be sent separately :-

A copy of the memorandum and a specimen impression of the seal used to seal the packet shall be sent to the public analyst separately by registered post or delivered to him or to any person authorised by him."

The relevant portion of R.7 is in the following terms :-

"7. Duties of a public analyst - (1) On receipt of a package containing a sample for analysis from a Food Inspector or any other person, the Public Analyst or an officer authorised by him shall compare the seals on the container and the outer cover with specimen impression received separately and shall note the contention of the seals thereon."

Having regard to the point thus put forward on behalf of the petitioner, I have looked into the evidence of P.W. 1 and I find that he had definitely not complied with Rule 18. In substance, the evidence of P.W. 1 is that in respect of this particular matter he had prepared four copies of what he described a "paper". One each of those copies was put by him in each of the three packets of the black pepper, evidently as contemplated by Sec.11 of the Act. The fourth copy of the said memorandum was retained by him in his possession, and it was produced from his custody in Court and marked Ext. 5. This evidence of P.W. 1 leaves no room for doubt that he had not complied with Rule 18. He has nowhere said that he had forwarded a specimen impression of the seal which he had used for the purpose of sealing the packet forwarded to the Public Analyst, either separately by registered post or by any messenger or otherwise. The specimen impression of the seal would have to be sent along with a copy of the memorandum in form VII. But, since the only other copy of the memorandum which P.W. 1 had prepared was still in his possession, the conclusion is irresistible that no copy of the said memorandum could possibly have accompanied any speci