9911796707
TMI Blog1960 (12) TMI 80X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of ₹ 2,000. The conviction and sentence were confirmed in appeal by the Court of Session at Allahabad and by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in revision. The appellant has appealed to this court with special leave under Art. 136 of the Constitution. The appellant was an employee of one Thakur Din who carries on business at 92-C, Mirganj, Allahabad as a vendor of edible oils and provisions. On September 22, 1956, a Food Inspector of the Allahabad Municipality purchased from the appellant a sample of mustard oil exposed for sale in the shop which on analysis was found to be adulterated with linseed oil. Thakur Din and the appellant were prosecuted in the court of the First C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... owledge he is not liable to be punished for contravening the provisions of the Act. Section 7 of the Act in so far as it is material provides: No person shall himself or by any person on his behalf -----sell--- --- (1) any adulterated food; The material part of s. 16(1) provides: If any person, (a) whether by himself or by any person on his behalf-----sells-----any article of food in contravention..of the provisions of this Act or he shall.................. be punishable........... That the mustard oil sold by the appellant was adulterated has not been challenged in this appeal. The appellant s plea that the mustard oil delivered to the Food Inspector was not meant for sale was disbelieved by the Trial ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ood is evidently imposed in the larger interest of maintenance of public health. The prohibition applies to all persons who sell adulterated food, and for contravention of the prohibition all such persons are penalised. Because the Legislature has sought to penalise a person who sells adulterated food by his agent, it cannot be assumed that it was intended to penalise only those who may act through their agents. If the owner of a shop in which adulterated food is sold is without proof of mens rea liable to be punished for sale of adulterated food, we fail to appreciate why an agent or a servant of the owner is not liable to be punished for contravention of the same provision unless he is shown to have guilty knowledge. The argument tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Class, Allahabad of the offence of adulteration of mustard oil and sentenced to pay a fine of ₹ 80. In the view of the Magistrate, the extract related to the appellant. The name of the person convicted and his father s name and residence were identical with the name of the appellant, his father s name and his residence. All the details given in the extract tallied with the description of the appellant. In the memorandum of appeal filed to the Court of Session challenging the conviction recorded by the Magistrate First Class, it was not contended that the person convicted in the earlier case was some person other than the appellant. But the appellant was merely an employee of Thakur Din. It is not shown that he made himself any pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
