Back
PRAVEER BHATNAGAR
Kartar Singh son of Shri Babulal – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan through Public Prosecutor – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. The matter pertains to an incident which occurred in the year 1995 and the present criminal revision is pending since the year 2005.
2. This criminal revision petition under Section 397 read with Section 401 Cr.P.C. has been preferred against the judgment dated 28.11.2005 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Behror, District Alwar in Criminal Appeal No.50/2005, as well as against the judgment dated 10.12.1999 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Behror, District Alwar in Criminal Case No.97/96, whereby the revisionist-petitioner was convicted and sentenced for the offence under Section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act to six months' simple imprisonment with fine of Rs.1000/-and in case of default of payment of fine, to further undergo one month's simple imprisonment.
3. Brief facts of the case are that the Food Inspector -Shri SD Sharma filed a compliant alleging that he made an inspection on 22.04.1995 at 7.30 AM in presence of the witnesses and found Kartar Singh, petitioner, was selling cow milk. On suspicion of adulteration, he took sample of milk and sent the same to the Public Analyst for testing, wherein t
The main legal point established is the application of legal provisions related to evidence, presumption, and the applicability of amended laws to the case.
The court applied the principle of presumption of service under Section 27 of the General Clauses Act and considered the applicability of new legal provisions to modify the sentence, demonstrating th....
Criminal liability for food adulteration requires evidence of intent; marginal deviations due to natural causes do not justify conviction or prosecution.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the importance of adhering to the prescribed standards and procedural requirements under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, and the ....
The court emphasized the compliance with the provisions of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, and the Rules, and discussed the applicability of the FSS Act, highlighting the imposition of....
The court upheld the conviction under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act but reduced the sentence to the period already served due to the lengthy trial and circumstances surrounding the case.
The defence of bona fide purchasers under Section 19 (2) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, is available only if the accused proves that they purchased the adulterated food from a duly....
The judgment emphasized the importance of placing all relevant materials before the sanctioning authority, the liability of individuals in a proprietorship concern, and the sufficiency of evidence in....
Point of Law : Court do not find any perversity, illegality or error in the impugned judgments warranting any interference at hands of this Court. [Para 25]
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
