M.N. Bhandari, J.

By this appeal, a challenge is made to the order dated 22.01.1993 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge Bayana, District Bharatpur in Sessions Case No.1/1991. The appellant was convicted for the offence under Section 27 A (ii) and 28 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 (hereinafter 'the Act of 1940'). He was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 2 years and a fine of Rs. 2,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo 6 months simple imprisonment for offence under Section 27 A (ii). The rigorous imprisonment for 6 months and a fine of Rs. 500/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo one month's simple imprisonment was imposed for offence under Section 28 of the Act of 1940. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that a complaint was made against the accused for administering allopathy drugs though he was not authorized being a Ayurvedic Chikitsak. The inspection was made and drugs were recovered from the appellant. No evidence came to prescribe those drugs or of sale. It was not a case of an adulteration of the drugs, thus the appellant was tried f