( 1 ) THIS is an appeal by the Municipal Board, Kanpur, against the order of the Additional City magistrate, Kanpur, acquitting the respondent of the offence under Section 7 read with Section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (VII of 1954), hereinafter called the Act.

( 2 ) BADLOO respondent was found selling milk on 24-9-1957. When asked by the food inspector he informed that he was selling mixed milk oil cow and buffalo. Thereupon the food inspector purchased some milk for the purpose of taking a sample thereof. One part of the sample was sent to the Public Analyst for examination. The Public Analyst reported that the sample contained 4. 8 per cent fat and 7. 4 per cent non-fatty solids. In his opinion the sample contained about 15 per cent added water and was adulterated. He has clearly stated in his report that the sample was analysed on the basis of the standards for mixed milk (cow and buffalo ).

( 3 ) THE Oral evidence is of little importance. The Municipal; Board tried to secure the conviction of the respondent on the report of the Public --Analyst. The report, according to the learned magistrate, did not prove the respondents guilt beyond reas