AHSAN HAFEEZ KAMAL vs THE STATE — 1964 PLD 45

Citation: 1964 PLD 45

Court: Sindh High Court

Year: 1969

Decision Date: 1969-08-20

Parties: AHSAN HAFEEZ KAMAL vs THE STATE

Headnotes

But the authority was distinguished on the ground that although the samples were not labelled but the petitioner when he was dissatisfied with the analysis of the samples sent A by the Food Inspector, himself moved the Court to send the samples which were delivered to him by the Inspector and consequently those samples were also sent and on analysis the same result was found. This point was also raised before me and it was strongly urged that in view of the aforesaid authority the absence of label on the samples violated the mandatory provisions of section 20 of West Pakistan Pure Food Ordinance and it vitiated the trial, with all respects I am in agreement with the view taken by his Lordship but the present case as observed by the learned Addi--tional Sessions Judge is distinguishable.

Judgment Text

Court Name: Sindh High Court Judge(s): Ghulam Rasool K. Shaikh Title: AHSAN HAFEEZ KAMAL vs THE STATE Case No.: Criminal Revision Application No. 15 of 1967 Date of Judgment:1969-08-20 Reported As: 1970 P Cr. L J 301 Result: Sentence reduce JUDGMENT JUDGMENT This is a revision petition against the judgment of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi dismissing the appeal filed against the conviction of the petitioner under section 6 (b) read with section 23, West Pakistan Prevention of Food Order, 1960 by A. C. M., K. M. C., Karachi. The petitioner was sentenced to undergo R. I. For 6 months and pay a fine of Rs. 1,000, or in default to undergo R. I. For six weeks. 2. On 3-2-1964, Mr. Wiqar Ahmad, Food Inspector of the K. M. C. Went to a sweatmeat shop where the petitioner Ahsan Hafiz Kamal was present and selling the sweatmeats. The Food Inspector- purchased Habshi Halva, Baloshahi and Namak--para, each half a seer, as samples for the` purpose of analysis and paid Rs. 5.23 as price. The petitioner had declared that these Articles had been prepared from pure Cow and Buffalo mixed ghee. Then the samples were divided into three parts which were du:y sealed and labelled. The required form was also prepared and it was signed by the Inspector as well as the petitioner. One part of each sample was delivered- to the petitioner while the remaining parts were taken away by the Inspector. One such part from each sample was sent to the chemical analyser who,-on analysis found the…

Read the full judgment on Al Wakeelo — Pakistan's AI-powered legal research platform.