The court applied the standard for milk quality prescribed under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and considered the arguable point regarding the intended sale of the milk.

S.C.Malte, J.

1. The analysis of the milk sample indicated that it contained only 2.0% of the fat and 8.5% of solids not fact. Thereby the milk fell below the standard prescribed under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. It was contended that the milk in question was boiled milk and no standard for boiled milk has been prescribed. On referring to the Clause A. 11.01.11 of the Act which prescribes the standard for different classes of milk. I find that the standard regarding boiled buffalo milk and also in respect of boiled cow milk has been prescribed. It was claimed by the petitioner that it was boiled cow milk. In respect of boiled cow milk the standard prescribed is that it should contain 3.5% of fat and 9.0% solids not fat. The analysis shows that the milk in question has fallen below the standard. However, it was brought to my notice that the milk weighing 5 litres only was at the tea-shop of the accused and from there the sample was taken. That raises arguable point on facts and law in so far as it pertains to the contention that the milk was not meant for sale. In view of that revision admitted.

Till the disposal of the revision, execution of the sentence suspended on petitioner executing bail bond and surety bond to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sirsa.