The certificate of the Public Analyst is conclusive as to the facts stated therein, but it is not conclusive as to whether the adulteration was due to factors for which the accused could not be held responsible.

S. RANGARAJAN, J. :- This is criminal appeal filed by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi with special leave under S.417(3), Criminal P.C. against the acquittal of the respondent-accused by learned Magistrate First Class, Delhi of an offence punishable under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. A few relevant facts alone may be noticed.

2. A sample of cow's milk was taken by the Food Inspector on 15th April, 1964 according to the rules. After compliance with the formalities prescribed by law requisite drops of formalin were also added to the sample and it was sent to the Public Analyst for examination, which was conducted on 16th April, 1964. The sample is said to have been kept in a refrigerator till the examination. In spite of the same, according to the Analyst's report, the solid fat contained in the milk was said to be only 2.28% as against 3.5%. The complaint, however, was filed, for no accounted reason, as late as 23rd September, 1964. The accused was served on 12th October, 1964. The second sample of the milk left with the accused was sent for examination by the Director, Central Food Laboratory on 17th February, 1965 and was actually examined by him on 16th March, 1965. According to his certificate the solid fat contents were 3.2% as against the minimum requirement on 3.5%.

After the receipt of the report from the Director, Central Food Laboratory, Calcutta the accused took the risk of examining Shri V.P. Bhatnagar, Public Analyst, appointed by the Delhi Administration, as a defence witness. It is explained at the bar that the Director of the Central Food Laboratory was not examined owing to the cost, which is said to be prohibitive, for securing his presence for examination in Court. A mere perusal of the statement of D.W. 1 shows that he was fencing and was in no mood to admit even scientific facts which may be regarded as family well established. In one portion of his examination he went so far as to state as follows :-

"It is incorrect that the fat will decrease and non-fatty solids would increase. I have gone through the report of the Public Analyst Ex. PE and the report of the Director, Central Food Laboratory, Calcutta (marked X) and find that the total solids of the two results are approximately the same, which shows that the sample has not changed much ..... Regarding non-fatty solids, when total solids is the same and the fat is higher in Director's report automatically non-fatty solids would be less, but the difference in the two reports is mainly due to the lapse of time."

3. It is worth repeating that whereas according to the Public Analyst the solid fat contents were 2.28% they were seen to be 3.2%, nearly 1% higher, a difference of nearly 50% over the results obtained by the Public Analyst. Whatever may be the attitude taken by D.W. 1 his evidence establishes that such variation in the result, obtained by the Public Analyst and by the Director of the Central Food Laboratory, was due to the lapse of time. We have referred to this portion of evidence prominently at the outset since to the same effect was the evidence of Dr. Sat Parkash, the Dairy Chemist in the Delhi Milk Scheme and a notified Public Analyst of the Delhi Administration, who was examined by the High Court of Punjab in Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Ghisa Ram, the decision in which case is reported in ILR (1965) 1 Punj 543. The effect of the evidence of Dr. Sat Parkash was set out on pages 548-49 of the report, of which paragraphs (d) and (f) are relevant for our purposes.

They are worth setting out in extenso : "That by the end of that time, that is to say by the end of a week, bacterial development will start taking place which will break the fat contents thus causing reduction in the same and as the time passes such reduction will increase, and that if such a sample is then kept, at that temperature, for more than a week, say 10 days, it will then start decomposing and consequently become unfit for analysis."

* * *

"That if to