https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192665 The court upheld the conviction of the applicant for selling adulterated coriander under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, sentencing them to 5 months rigorous imprisonment and a fine of 200. The court found no reason to doubt the Food Inspector's qualifications or procedural compliance, dismissing challenges related to witness presence, seal comparison, and prosecution consent. Although an error was noted in imposing a fine below the prescribed amount, it was not enhanced due to the applicant's circumstances. The court ultimately affirmed the conviction, rejecting the revision. en-us Tue, 13 Aug 1974 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 09 Jun 2017 18:42:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192665 The court upheld the conviction of the applicant for selling adulterated coriander under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, sentencing them to 5 months rigorous imprisonment and a fine of 200. The court found no reason to doubt the Food Inspector's qualifications or procedural compliance, dismissing challenges related to witness presence, seal comparison, and prosecution consent. Although an error was noted in imposing a fine below the prescribed amount, it was not enhanced due to the applicant's circumstances. The court ultimately affirmed the conviction, rejecting the revision. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 13 Aug 1974 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192665