SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1967 Supreme(Ker) 84

M.U.ISAAC
ABDULLA HAJI – Appellant
Versus
FOOD INSPECTOR, MULIYAR PANCHAYAT – Respondent


Judgment :-

1. The petitioners are accused Nos.1 and 2 respectively in C. C. No. 172 of 1965 on the file of the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Hosdrug. They were convicted by the learned Magistrate for the offence under S.16 (1) (a) read with S.7 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and R.44-A of the Rules made thereunder; and each of them was sentenced to undergo Simple Imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-. They filed an appeal in the Sessions Court of Tellicherry as Crl. Appeal No. 93 of 1965. Their conviction and sentence were confirmed by the learned Sessions Judge. The petitioners have therefore, come in revision before this Court.

2. Petitioner No.1 is a dealer in provision articles within the Muliyar Panchayat. Second petitioner is a salesman in the provision shop. On 31-5-1965 at 10.45 A. M. pw.1 the Food Inspector of the Panchayat inspected the provision shop of the first petitioner; and pw.1 found lac dhal otherwise known as Kesari dhal exposed for sale in the said shop. The first petitioner was not then present in the shop; and the second petitioner was in charge of the same. pw.1 purchased from the seco







































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top