1998 (7) TMI 709

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of Food Adulteration Act, 1955. Both the courts have concurrently found that it was the appellant who had sold curd which was found to be adulterated. The certificate issued by the Public Analyst and subsequently by the Central Food Laboratory show that the curd was deficient in respect of milk fat and milk solids of non fat. We see no reason to differ from the findings recorded by both the court .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... as also submitted by the learned counsel that the offence had taken place in 1979 and the appellant's father, who was the owner of the shop has now died and, therefore, some leniency should be shown to him. We cannot accept this submission because once the offence is held proved, the minimum sentence has to be imposed. 4. As we find no substance in this appeal, it is dismissed. The appellant .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X