JUDGMENT :

1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record.

2. Revisionist has filed this revision challenging therein judgment and order dated 27.05.2005 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sultanpur in Criminal Case No. 4423 of 2003 (State Vs. Amar Bahadur Singh) whereby revisionist has been convicted for an offence punishable under Section 7/16 of The Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 and has been sentenced for rigorous imprisonment of six months with a fine of Rs. 1,000/-and judgment and order dated 22.08.2007 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 2, Sultanpur whereby Criminal Appeal No. 49 of 2005 (Amar Bahadur Singh Vs. State of U.P.) has been dismissed.

3. A complaint case was filed against revisionist in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sultanpur which was registered as Criminal Case No. 4423 of 2003 under Section 7/16 of The Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954.

4. Complainant, Smt. Kiran Yadav in the complaint has stated that she is Food Inspector and found revisionist, Amar Bahadur Singh carrying 30 litres milk for sale on 09.08.2003 at 11:00 a.m. near Police Station Lambhua, District Sultanpur. She, on being suspicious of adulteration in milk, gave her introduction to revisionist, Amar Bahadul Singh and by paying Rs. 9/-, purchased 750 ml. milk. In the complaint, it has been further stated that the aforesaid milk was distributed in three equal parts and was put in three clean bottles and in each bottle, 20-20 drops of 40% formalin was added and thereafter caps were put on each bottle and all the three samples were properly sealed. One sample was deposited in the office of Chief Medical Officer, Sultanpur for sending it to Public Analyst at Lucknow. It was further stated in the complaint that later on Public Analyst, Government of Uttar Pradesh after examining the aforesaid sample, has forwarded his report vide letter dated 26.08.2003 and in the said report it is mentioned that fat in the milk has been found 14% less than the standard of fat prescribed for cow milk.

5. Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate took cognizance over the aforesaid complaint thereafter complainant, Food Inspector, Smt. Kiran Yadav got herself examined under Section 244 Cr.P.C. and she was also cross-examined.

6. On the aforesaid basis, learned Trial Court framed charges against the revisionist under Section 7/16 of The Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 on 03.12.2004. Revisionist pleaded not guilty and therefore, learned Trial Court started trial.

7. Statement of revisionist was also recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C.

8. Learned Trial Court has considered the testimony of Food Inspector, Smt. Kiran Yadav and found her version absolutely correct. Further Trial Court recorded a finding that Public Analyst, Govt. of U.P., after examination of the sample of the milk collected by Smt. Kiran Yadav, has given its report that fat in the sample of milk was found 14% less than standard of fat fixed for the cow milk, therefore, revisionist is liable to be convicted for offence punishable under Section 7/16 of The Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 and thereby has sentenced him for rigorous imprisonment of six months with fine of Rs. 1,000/-.

9. Revisionist challenged the aforesaid judgment and order dated 27.05.2005 passed by learned Trial Court in Criminal Case No. 4423 of 2003 by filing Criminal Appeal No. 49 of 2005 (Amar Bahadur Singh Vs. State) before Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.2, Sultanpur.

10. Learned Appellate Court has considered the evidence appreciated by the trial court and, thereafter has passed order on 22.08.2007 wherein it has been concluded that the prosecution has proved its case against the accused under Section 16(1)(a)(i) of The Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 and therefore, conviction and sentence given vide judgment and order dated 27.05.2005 passed by the learned Tr