ORDER :-

The petitioner has been convicted under S. 16 (1) (a) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (Act no. 37 of 1954) (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 250 in default to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for one month. Prosecution case is that the petitioner was carrying adulterated milk for sale in Puri town on 15-6-63. The defence was that the milk was not being taken for sale and there was no adulteration. The learned Courts below concurrently found that the milk was adulterated.

2. Mr. Harichandan advanced two contentions :-

(1) Prosecution infringed Rr. 7 and 18 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules) inasmuch as there is no proof that a specimen impression of the seal the packet was sent to the public Analyst separately and the Public Analyst compared the seal on the container and the outer cover with the specimen impression received separately. Infringement of these mandatory rules vitiated the report of the Public Analyst. The conviction based on such a report only is illegal.

(2) The prosecution was launched about five and half months after the detection when the milk had decomposed.