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

1977 Supreme(Raj) 138

M.L.SHRIMAL, A.P.SEN, M.L.JOSHI
Narain Prasad – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent


Advocates:
Appearance :
D.S. Shishodia, Public Prosecutor, for the Respondents

Judgment

M.L. Shrimal, J.-Tersely speaking shorn of unnecessary details the prosecution case as disclosed at the trial is that on Sept. 6, 1970 Food Inspector Shri V.D. Sharma visited the shop of the petitioner Narain Prasad and found him selling sweet-meats. The Food Inspector after disclosing his identity demanded from him a sample of’Ghewar.’ The accused-petitioner refused to take the prescribed notice in the prescribed form No. 6 and also refused to sell him the sample of’Ghewar’. He was tried for contravening the provisions of Section 16 (1) (b) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). The learned Magistrate First Class, Ajmer found the accused guilty under Section 16 (1) (b) of the Act and sentenced him to one day’ s simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 750/-and in default of the payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for 15 days, vide his judgment dated Nov. 29, 1971.

2. Being aggrieved by the judgment of his conviction and sentence passed by the learned Magistrate, the accused petitioner went in appeal before the learned Sessions Judge, Ajmer but without any success.

3. On revision, the case came up for decisi









































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