✦ Punjab & Haryana High Court · 04 Mar 2010

CrleRevne v. Food

LRMUNISHDESWAL, GENERAL, HRYANAFOR T HERESPONDENT T E, MOHI NDER PAL5 min read

Case at a glance

Judgment

60 0 b CrleRevne NO1602 of2003 1 I NTHE HI GH COURT OF PUNJAB 82 HARYANA AT CI I ANDI GARH CrleRevneNO01602of2003 DATEOF DECI SI ON March 04 2010 Salam udin VS Food I nspect orand anot her eeePETI TI ONER eeeRESPONDENTS CORAM2 HONBLE MR JUSTI CE NlOHlNDER PAL PRESENT MrSat ishChaudharyAdvocat e lor t he lvlrMunishDeswal General Hryanafor t herespondent t at e MOHI NDER PAL J m 0 0 I 0 I Z r m 7 Z This revision has been 8 I ed by againstt he dat ed 152003 passedbyt he Addit ional Sessions JudgeYam una Nagarat Jagadhriwherebyappealagainstt he of convict ionand sent ence order dat ed16032001 passedbyt he Addit ionalChief Judicial Magist rat Jagadhriconvict ingt he pet it ioner under Sect ion 166196a9lread wit h Sect ion 7 of t he Prevent ion of Food Adult erat ionAct 1954 or short t he Act I and hiin t o undergo Parkash Om rigorous 15: 39 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh for a periodof six inont hs and t o pay a One of Rs10001 in default whereoft o undergofurt her sim ple JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document for a 61 v0 A 1 0 C I C3 Z 2 r I ot j m 7 Z Qm CrleRevn NO1602 of2003 2 1 periodoft wo m ont hswas dism issed The fact sof t lle case i n brief are t hat Oll 151989 Sh Chunni Lal Governm entFood I nspect or Chhachhrauli t urningChhachhrauliwho was having 60 lit ers ofcows m ilk in t hreedruins which was m eant for publicsale Flle Governinent Food I nspect ordisclosedhis ident it yt o t he 750 inls of inilk for analysis Rs00 by t he Public AnalystUlt im at elyt he which ult im at elywas foundadult erat edvide repot loO3xJEI flled againstt he in t heCourt On t he basis of evidence adduced by t he accusedwas chargedunder Sect ion 161l6il read wit h Sect ion7 oft he Act He did not pleadguilt yt o t he chargeand claiinedt rial I n support of it s case t he exam ined Governm entFood I nspect or Chuni Lal PHl DrNKWadhawan PW2 Shanna PW3 and Mam Chand PW4 PW Lal Chand was given up byt he beingwon over byt he accused ln his st at em ent orecordedunderSect ion313 of t he Code of Crim inal Procedure Salam udin denied t he evidence and pleadedinnocence No evidencewas led by t he 111 defence I have heard t he leained counsel for t he part lesand have gonet hrought he records oft he case Sam pleof cows m ilk t aken by t he Governillent Food who was found in of60 I it res JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document found adult erat edbyt he Public AnalystReportof t he Public I nspect orfrom Parkash Om 15: 39 True Scanned Copy Of Original of m ilk was PHHC,Chandigarh 62 0 t Z 0 0 I C9 I Z 1 C I 08 m 7 Z 0 CrleRevn NO1602 of2003 3 1 Analystshowedt hatt he m ilk fat iil t he sam plewas 4O0I oand inilk solid not fat was 73I o and t hus t llerewas wit h regardt o m ilk fat in t he by 12I o of t he m inim um st andardsThe has been by t he evidenceof Chuni Lal t he Govem m entFood PW1 1 DrNCWadhawail 0W2I aild Sllaiilla PW39 The sam plewas t akenby t he Governm entFood I nspect or Chuni Pal 6PWI 111 t he presence of Sharlna PW3I The wit nesseshad 110 enm it ywit h t he accusedt o falselyiinplicat e him in t his case The evidence provedOll recordt hat t hesam pleofcows m ilk nleant for publicsale was seizedfrom by t he t he accusedwhich was sent t o t he Public AnalystHaryana analysiswho vide reportExE foundt he sam e adult erat edas m ent ioned above The t hus incurred t he liabilit yof offence under Sect ion16 1 read wit h Sect ion70f t he Act I n fact learned counsel for t he could not seriouslychallenget hc prosecut t oncase duringt he course of argum entwhich st ands provedOt l record As such COllVlCt 1011of Salam udinunder Scct ion read wit h Sect ion 70f t he Act as recorded by bot h t he Court s below 1S m aint ained However keepingin view t he fact s and Clrculnst ances of t he case part icularlyt he fact t hat Sword of Dam ocles has rem ainedhangingover t he head of Salainudin for t he I ast lllOre t han t went yyears as t he case relat est o 15101989 and t he pet it ioner hasfaced incarcerat ionfor 19 daysI am oft he consideredopiniont hat ends ofj ust icewill be Parkash Om 15: 39 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh m et if t he sent ence awarded t o t lle pet it ioneris JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document rcduced t o t he periodalready by h iin and sent ence of I lne is 63 41 CrleRevneNO1602 of2003 4 1 0 C I C Z Z r 06 r 7 Z Qu enhancedt o Rs0001 I order t he sent ence order The wi Il depositt he am ountof fine in t he t rial Court wit hin a periodof t wo m ont hsfrom t he dat eof receiptof a cert it led copy of t his orderNeedless t o say if t he fails t o t he diorect ionof t he ainount of fine of Rs0001 in t he t rial Court wlt llit l t he period above t he sent ence of rigorous as awarded bybot h t he Court s below shall rem ain unalt ered Wit h t he abovecondit ionalm odificat ion in t he sent ence Ordert his pet it ionis dism issed March 04 2010 Jl 1 1 JUDGE 1 Parkash Om 15: 39 True Scanned Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Punjab & Haryana High Court or eCourts case status. ← Search more judgments