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

1962 Supreme(Raj) 16

BHARGAVA
Sohan – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
U.R. Tatia, for Petitioner; Amrit Raj, for State

BHARGAVA, J. This is an application in revision by Sohan against his conviction under sec. 16 read with sec. 7 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act 1954 (hereinafter called the Act). The trial Magistrate sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for three months and a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine to further imprisonment for three months. In appeal the sentence was reduced to payment of fine of Rs. 500/- only.

2. The charge against him was that on 3rd March, 1959 at about 9 a. m. he was found selling cows milk near Kabootron-ka-Chowk in Jodhpur City from which some milk was purchased by the Food Inspector of Jodhpur Municipality who divided it in three parts, filled it in three bottles, sealed them and sent one of them to the public Analyst and on his report that it was adulterated, obtained the consent of the Chairman, Municipal Board for his prosecution and filed a complaint in the court of the Munsif Magistrate, First Class, Jodhpur. The report of the public Analyst showed that the percentage of solid non-fat did not conform to the prescribed standard. The courts below have therefore found that the petitioner was guilty of selling adulterated milk.

3. It is n













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