Judgment This is an appeal by the State of Madras against the acquittal of the two accused, Parthasarathi Ayyangar and Karuppa Konar, in C.C. No. 2195 of 1953 on the file of the Sub-Magistrate, Tiruchirapalli. The facts are briefly these. These two accused were charge-sheeted under rule 37-A(a) of the Madras Prevention of Adulteration Act for having added a substance other than chicory to coffee intended for sale in their shop. The first accused was the proprietor of the shop, and the second accused was a servant under him, aiding in sale of the jars containing coffee power. On an analysis it was found that the jars contained 75 per cent. coffee and 25 per cent. foreign adulterant which was not chicory and which was identified as wild roasted date seeds. The correctness of the analysis was not disputed by the accused. What they said was that they were selling these jars of coffee powder obtained from Kumar Coffee Works, and that they believed the assurance of the company that the jars contained 75 per cent. coffee and 25 per cent. chicory, which is permissible under the rules and that they had no reason to believe that the Kumar Coffee Works had mixed a foreign adulterant other than chicory, like powdered wild date seeds. They also relied on Exhibit D-2, dated 5th September, 1953, a communication by them to the Health Officer stating these facts, and on a communication, Exhibit D-1, dated 5th June, 1953, from one Padmakumar, the proprietor of the Kumar Coffee Works. The learned Public Prosecutor rightly pointed out that the Prevention of Adulteration Act and Rules framed thereunder are intended to protect the purchasers of coffee powder and other food from adulteration, and that under section 6(2) of the Prevention of Adulteration Act, certain conditions have to be fulfilled before an accused could rely on a defence that he had no reason to believe at the time, when he sold the food, that it was not of such nature, substance or quality as described in the jars, and that in all such cases therefore it would be no defence to say merely that the vendor was ignorant of the thing, substance or quality. Here, the jars sold by the accused were clearly labelled as containing 75 per cent. coffee and 25 per cent. Here, the jars sold by the accused were clearly labelled as containing 75 per cent. coffee and 25 per cent. chicory, and the accused failed to show that the jars supplied to them by Kumar and Company contained 75 per cent. coffee and 25 per cent. foreign adulterant, namely, powdered wild date seeds. We are not concerned here with the question whether powdered wild date seeds are inferior to chicory. The law has laid down that chicory, and no other substance, shall be mixed with coffee, and, so the admixture of any other substance, like powdered wild date seeds, will be an offence. The lower Court has overlooked the provisions of section 6(2) and has therefore not applied rule 37-A(a) to this case. I set aside the acquittal of both the accused, and convict them of an offence under rule 37-A (a). After taking all the circumstances into consideration, including the plea of Mr. Narayanaswami for a light sentence, I direct each of the accused to pay a fine of Rs. 5 or, in default, to undergo S.I. for 7 days. Fifteen day’s time is given for them to pay the fine, as prayed for. K.S. ----- Appeal allowed.