JUDGMENT :

1. This Revision is preferred against the judgment and order dated 05.08.2006 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Cachar, Silchar in CR No.2391/2001 convicting the petitioner under section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 and sentencing the petitioner to suffer imprisonment for 6 months and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- in default to suffer imprisonment for one month more.

2. Heard Mr. SK Ghosh, learned counsel for the revision petitioners and Mr. D Das, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State.

3. The prosecution case in brief is that on 24.05.2001 at about 1.30pm the Food Inspector Sri S Dutta complainant of this case accompanied by Sri HA Laskar, Executive Magistrate, Silchar and two officers of the Food & Civil Supplies visited the shop premises of M/S Raj Trading Co. At Lakhipur Road, Silchar. At that time accused Prasanta Paul was in the shop conducting the affairs of the business. He was the proprietor of the said trading company. They inspected various food articles kept in the shop premises for sale for human consumption. The complainant also introduced himself to the accused as Food Inspector. During the inspection he suspected some articles as substandard with relation to quality and found about two dozens of sterilised milk paneer packet in tins of "Gopal" Brand. Suspecting the quality of the aforesaid food item, the complainant after completion of all formalities as laid down in the Act and the Rules, purchased three sealed containers of paneer weighting 200 grams each on payment of Rs.75/-. Formal vouchers/cash memo were issued to the complainant. Thereafter the complainant again sealed, packed and levelled the three containers separately as per rules. All the formalities were completed in presence of the Inspector of Food and Civil supplies and the Executive Magistrate Sri HA Laskar. Thereafter one of the three sealed packed and levelled containers was sent to FSL as per the provisions of the PFA Act. The FSL after due analysis of the paneer found that the sample of sterilised milk paneer "Brand Gopal" does not conform to the standard and the said report of the public analysis was communicated to the public Health Authority who in their turn communicated to the complainant. The complainant thereafter obtaining written sanction from the Health Authority filed the complaint before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate with an information to the accused that if the accused so desired he might apply to the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate to get the sample analysed again from the Central Food Laboratory. The accused though appeared in the court but did not apply for re- examination by the Central Food Laboratory.

4. The accused person face the trial before the court and denied the charge under Section 7/16 of the PFA Act that was framed by the learned trial court. Prosecution examined three witnesses in support of their case and defence also examined two witness in rebuttal. Plea of defence is of total denial. The learned trial court at the conclusion of the trial has convicted the accused person under section 7/16 of PFA Act and sentence him to SI for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- in default imprisonment for one month.

5. Being aggrieved the accused preferred an appeal before the court of Additional Sessions Judge, FTC Cachar, Silchar and appeal was dismissed by affirming the conviction and sentence of the trial court.

6. Challenging the aforesaid order, the present revision petition has been preferred on the ground that the trial court as well as appellate court has failed to appreciate the evidence in proper perspective of law and facts which has resulted miscarriage of justice.

7. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner the article seized by the Food Inspector was not kept in the shop premises for sale of human consumption rather it was kept in the godown at the back side of the shop for destruction as it was damaged. But, however, the article w