RAKESH KUMAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Admit.

(2.) This revision petition is directed against the order dated 28/2/2001 passed by the court of Shri H S Sharma, Additional Sessions Judge, New Delhi upholding the Judgment of conviction and the order of sentence passed by the trial court ordering the petitioner to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment (for short RI) for one year and fine of Rs.5,000.00 in default to further undergo RI for three months. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the.point involved i'n this petition is very short; that the petitioner does not want to challenge his conviction on merits and that the revision be heard and disposed of at this stage itself.

(3.) Brief facts are that as per the prosecution case, the Food Inspector took the sample of 'Lal Mirch Powder' from the petitioner on 4/12/1991 for analysis under the provisions of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter called the Act). The sample was declared to be adulterated by the Public Analyst, Delhi vide his report dated 12/12/1991. Petitioner was prosecuted and was convicted u/ss 7/16 of the Act by the Court of Shri M.K. Gupta, Metropolitan Magistrate, Delhi on 1/10/1997 and was sentenced to undergo RI for one year and to pay fine of Rs.5,000.00 in default to further undergo RI for three months. The learned trial court refused to extend the benefit of the provisions of section 20-AA of the Act and declined to release the petitioner on probation. Against the said judgment and order petitioner filed an appeal (Cr.ANo.69/99/1997). The court of Shri H.S. Sharma, the Additional Sessions Judge, New Delhi on 28/2/2001, upheld the conviction and the sentence awarded by the trial court. In appeal also petitioner did not challenge his conviction and only prayed for probation as he was less than 18 years of age on the date of the commission of the offence. Aggrieved against Judgment of the Appellate Court, the petitioner has filed this revision petition.