SAHDEV vs STATE OF PUNJAB

AMIT RANA 2026.05.12 15:44 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judgement/order CRR-2279-2009 2 Road, Bareta. Petitioner was having in his possession six packets of 250 gm. each tea leaves (Brooke Bond) for sale for human consumption. The Government Food Inspector (complainant) disclosed his identity to the petitioner and served a notice in form No. VI, prescribed under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955 (hereinafter to be referred as the PTA Rules) and purchased sealed three packets of 250 gm. Each of Brooke Bond tea leaves for a sum of Rs.60/-. Each packet was labeled and then wrapped in a strong thick paper. One sample packet was sent to the office of Public Analyst, Punjab, Chandigarh, as per the procedure prescribed under the Act and the Rules. Report of Public Analyst, Punjab, Chandigarh was received through Civil Surgeon-cum-District Health Authority, Mansa. The product was declared misbranded as the packet was not labeled in accordance with provisions of Rule 32 of the PTA Rules, as code/lot/batch number of the product was not given. M/s Narain Singh Sri Chand, accused No.2 before the trial Court (since deceased) was whole sale seller and Managing