( 1 ) IN this appeal the State has challenged the order of acquittal passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate Ahmedabad in Summary Case No. 92 of 1378 acquitting the accused of the charges under section 7 read with section 16 (1) cl. (a) sub-cl. (i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. The prosecution story is that the accused had adulterated cow milk with water. A sample was taken from the milk that was being sold by the accused and sent to the Public Analyst for analysis to find out its contents. The Public Analyst carried out the analysis and submitted his report which is produced at Exh. 11 of this case which shows that the milk fat contents of the milk in question was 5. 0 percent and non-fat solid was 7. 5%. As against that the required percentage prescribed be law is 3. 5% milk fat and 8. 5% non-fat solid substance. It is clear from this report that the milk in question contained considerably higher percentage of tat whereas it contained non-fat solid substance about 1% less than the minimum prescribed by law. The prosecution has alleged that there was an addition of water to the milk equivalent to about 11%. It is comman ground that the exact pe