Preserving the sample in polythene cover does not violate R.14, and unchallenged evidence establishes the accused's involvement in the business.

1. The trial court and the appellate court have concurrently found the revision petitioner (second accused) guilty under S.7 (i) read with S.16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (for short 'the Act') and R.44A of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules (for short 'the Rules'). He has been sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for six months. The first accused was likewise convicted and sentenced by the trial court, but the same has been set aside by the appellate court. Second Accused being aggrieved has filed this revision petition.

2. The Food Inspector, Alleppey Municipality filed a complaint against the two accused, father and son, alleging that on 12-12-1977 he visited the shop of which first accused is the licensee, found second accused conducting the business in the shop and after observing the legal formalities purchased 750 grams of peas dhall but of the larger stock exhibited for sale in the premises and put each part of the sample in a polythene bag or cover and the same on analysis was found to contain 82% kesari dhall and therefore adulterated. The Food Inspector was examined as P. W.1. Two attestors to Ext. P3 mahazar were examined as P.Ws 2 and 3, but they turned hostile. Acting on the evidence of P. W.1 and partially on the evidence of P. W. 2 and relying on Ext. P5 report of the Public Analyst, the two courts below held the second accused guilty of selling adulterated peas dhall. We are not concerned with the acquittal of the first accused, however wrong it may be.

3. Learned counsel for the revision petitioner raised two contentions before us. First is that in sampling the food article, P. W.1 violated R.14 of the Rules inasmuch as the three equal parts of the sample were put in three polythene covers and not in bottles or jars and that has prejudiced the revision petitioner. Second contention is that the revision petitioner has nothing to do with the business and therefore he is not criminally liable.

4. R.14 of the Rules reads thus:

"Samples of food for the purpose of analysis shall be taken in clean dry bottles or jars or in other suitable containers which shall be closed sufficiently tight to prevent leakage, evaporation, or in the case of dry substance, entrance of moisture and shall be carefully sealed."

The rule requires sample to be taken in clean dry bottles or clean dry jars or in other suitable containers. They have to be closed sufficiently tight to prevent leakage or evaporation. Where the sample taken is a dry substance, it shall be closed sufficiently tight to prevent entrance of moisture. All the containers shall be carefully sealed. The container whether it be a bottle or a jar or otherwise must necessarily be clean and dry. That is to ensure that the sample is analysed in the state in which it was sold by the vendor. The rule refers to "bottle or jar or other suitable container". The container must be closed tight to prevent leakage and evaporation or in the case of dry substance to prevent entrance of moisture, in other words, to ensure any part of the sample from getting out of the container or in the case of dry substance to ensure that moisture from outside does not enter the sample. The rule does not exhaustively enumerate all the kinds of containers which could be used. Reference to bottle and jar is not exhaustive. Any other suitable container can be used. The suitability of a container would ordinarily depend on the nature of the food article dealt with. The rule itself does not create any inherent limitation or restriction except that the container must be suitable.

5. Peas dhall is a dry hard substance. In order to preserve and safeguard peas dhall, it need not necessarily be put in a bottle or jar. It can be preserved and safeguarded in polythene cover also. What has to be ensured is that the quantity of peas dhall put in the cover is not reduced by leakage and