M.C.D. Vs. ROOP CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal revision has been preferred by Municipal Corporation of Delhi (for short MCD) assailing the sentence dated 6 8.1977 imposed by the learned (rial court upon the petitioner whereby the petitioner was given the benefit of Sec. 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 and was ordered to be released on probation subject to his furnishing bond in the sum of Rs. 3,000.00 with one surety in the like amount for keeping the peace and to be of good behaviour for one year with the condition to appear in the court and receive sentence when called upon during such period. The petitioner had been convicted under Sec. 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act 1954. The aforesaid sentence has been assailed as being lenient whereas such leniency in sentence is not desirable in cases under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act.

(2.) Respondent Roup Chand was working as an employee of Co-accused Kishan Lal at the latter's stall No. 9 Inter-State Bus Terminal, Kashmere Gate, Delhi at about 12.00 noon on 20-9-1975 and was keeping maida there for preparation of puris and samosas for sale on behalf of co-accused Kishan Lal. When this stall was visited by Food Inspector T. R. Tuli who lifted the sample of maida which, on analysis by Public Analyst, was found to be adulterated and unfit for human consumption on account of the presence of 9 white living insects therein. He was further charged that at the time of lifting of the sample he had no licence for sale of puris and Samosa as required under Rule 50 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1954.

(3.) The order of sentence passed by the learned trial court goes to show that the learned trial court was impressed by the following reasons for giving him benefit of Probation of Offenders Act:-