' This revision application is directed against the Judgment of 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi, rejecting the appeal filed by the applicant against the order of A. C. M. (K. M. C.) convicting the appellant for an offence under section 6(1)(a)(c) read with section 23 of the West Pakistan Pure Food Ordinance and sentencing him to undergo R. I. For one year and to pay a fine of Rs, 1,000 or in default to suffer further R. I. For 3 months.
2. The prosecution story in brief is that or 19-5-73 Food Inspector, K. M. C. Purchased sample of buffaloe curd from the milk shop of the applicant. This sample was divided into three portions and sealed in bottles with added. Formation. The declaration form was signed by the applicant showing that he had sold a sample of buffaloe curd. The copy of the declaration form and one of the three samples was given to the applicant as usual. The report of the public analyst showed that the sample was non-genuine and it contained 28% added water. On the application of the applicant the other sample was sent to the chemical analyser who also sent his report that the sample was deficient by 10 % milk fat.
3. The facts of the case are more or less admitted. Both the analysts' report showed that the sample of buffaloe curd was not genuine and was adultrated. The declaration form was signed by the applicant and it is presumed that the description of the sample as given in the declaration form is correct. Under the circumstances the applicant was convicted by the K. M. C., Magistrate and sentenced as above and in appeal this conviction was maintained.
4. The learned counsel on behalf of the applicant have moved for reduction of the sentence on the ground that if pure milk cannot be had then it is not, possible for anyone to prepare pule curd.
However, the Ordinance was amended on 15-5-1973 and a minimum sentence of imprisonment for one year and fine of Rs, 1,000 had been fixed; the maximum being imprisonment for 7 years. The offence was committed after this amendment was published. Under the circumstances it would not be possible to produce the sentence which is the minimum prescribed under the law. The revision application is accordingly dismissed.
5. The applicant is on bail, his bail bond is cancelled and he may be remanded to custody to serve out his sentence.