Kanshi Ram Jagan Nath And Others vs The State on 28 July, 1961
In view of the decision of this court in Kanshi Nath (supra) the
arguments made on behalf of the State by the learned APP that the trial court
should have only considered the CFL report and not the PA report holds no
ground as the perusal of the trial court judgment delineates substantial variance
in the percentage of 'milk fats' and 'solids not fat' value between the report of
the PA and the Director CFL. The State has not satisfactorily explained the said
variance.