' The applicant was convicted by the A. D. M., K. M. C. Court, Karachi of an offence under section 6(1)
(b) and (e) read with section 23 of the West Pakistan Pure Food Ordinance and he was sentenced to undergo R. I. For 12th months and to pay a fine of Rs, 1,000 or in default to suffer R.
1. For 3 months more. The applicant preferred an appeal which was heard by the First Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi. The conviction and sentence were maintained by the Additional Sessions Judge and the appeal was dismissed.
1. The prosecution case is that on 1F-4-1973, K. M. C. Food Inspector visited the ration shop of the applicant in Jacob Lines, Karachi and purchased samples of chilly powder observing the formalities provided in the Ordinance and the rules. The report of the Public Analyst showed that the samples contained starch bodies and bran particles of wheat to the extent of 50%. The applicant was then prosecuted in the Court, and convicted as above. The version of the applicant was that he had recently purchased the ration shop and this chilly powder although it was kept in the shop was rejected as it was from old stock and it was not for sale.
2. It has been argued by Mr. Nooruddin Sarki that the samples of chilly powder were not taken before two respectable mashirs of the locality as provided under section 103, Cr. P. C. However, this is hardly a point which can he raised in a case of this nature. It has not been disputed that the samples of chilly powder were taken from: the stock kept in the Ration shop. There is a presumption that if any article is kept in the shop it is meant for sale. The presmce of mashirs from the locality could not have improved the case. Mr. Nooruddin Sarki has then prayed for reduction of the sentence. The sentence passed is of one year and subsequently by an amendment this was prescribed as the minimum sentence. In any case the sentence is a matter entirely for the discretion of the Court concerned and unless the sentence is out of proportion to the alleged offence, no interference is called for.
3. The conviction and sentence are accordingly maintained and the revision application is dismissed. The applicant is on bail he may now be remanded to serve out the remaining part of the sentence.