JUDGMENT V.N. Misra, J. - This is an application in revision by Ram Bali against the judgment and order of Sri J.P. Saxena, Sessions Judge, Azamgarh, by means of which he dismissed Criminal Appeal No. 108 of 1980 and confirmed the judgment of the Judicial Magistrate, Phulpur convicting the applicant under Section 7/16, Food Adulteration Act and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and also to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-. 2. It was contended that in this case the report of the Public Analyst was not sent to the applicant and, therefore, he was prejudiced because he could not send the sample to the Director of Central Food Laboratory, Calcutta for a check up of the report. In this Act Rule 9(j) was enacted and on 1-4-1976 section 13(2) was introduced for the same purpose and Rule 9(j) was removed. The purpose of both Rule 9(j) and section 13(2) clearly was to provide opportunity to the person from whom sample was taken so that he may also send the sample to the Director of Central Food Laboratory, Calcutta, so that the sample may be analysed once again and the finding arrived at by the Public Analyst at Lucknow may be confirmed. In this case, the Food Inspector took time but could not produce any evidence to show that he had sent a copy of the report of the Public Analyst to the applicant. That being so, the applicant was very much prejudiced and his conviction cannot be maintained. This view was also taken by J.M.L. Sinha, J. in Keshar Singh v. State of U.P., 1980 (1) FAC 318. 3. This revision is allowed. The conviction and sentence of the applicant are set aside. He is on bail. He need not surrender and his bail bonds are hereby discharged.