Law: West Pakistan Pure Food Ordinance (VII of 1960)

Section: 23(1),23(6)

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 255,342

  West Pakistan Pure Food Ordinance (VII of 1960), S. 23 (1) (b) and Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), Ss. 255 & 342 - Plea of guilty - Mere admission, during examination under S. 342, Cr. P. C., by accused of an act alleged to be offence-Cannot amount to admission of guilt if act complained of does not properly constitute an offence under law- Conviction under S. 23 (1) (b), West Pakistan Pure Food Ordinance, 1960 of person on his admission of having sold food stuff' below standard without clear proof as to what was standard demanded in respect of that food-stuff-Not justified.   West Pakistan Pure Food Ordinance (VII of 1960), S. 23(1)(6) read with West Pakistan Pure Food Rules, 1965, r. 46-Samples supplied to Public Analyst should not be less than specified quantity-Analysis made on deficient quantity bf sample-Held, legally defective and vitiates opinion of Analyst- Certificate based on such analysis cannot conclusively prove guilt of accused.   Date of hearing: 10th June 1966.   JUDGMENT   This is a revision petition by Muhammad Shah, a shop keeper of Mardan, against his conviction under section 23 (1) (b) of the West Pakistan Pure Food Ordinance (VII of 1960), as amended by the West Pakistan Pure Food (Amendment) Act, 1965 (hereinafter to be referred as the Ordinance). As it was his second conviction under the Ordinance he was sentenced under section 23 (1) (b) of the Ordinance to six months' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 200.00 or in default of payment of fine to three months' further rigorous imprisonment by the Additional District Magistrate, Mardan (Mr. Haji Muhammad Attal Khan) by his order dated the 24th of March 1966. He was further directed under section 30 of the Ordinance to pay a sum of Rs. 30.00 for the expenses incurred in connection with the fees paid to the Public Analyst in respect of the chemical analysis of the black tea recovered from his possession and which was the subject-matter of the charge against him. He preferred an appeal to the Additional Sessions Judge, Mardan (Mirza Abdullah Jan), who upheld his conviction and sentence other than that of fine of Rs. 200.00 which was…