STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. DAHYABHAI DESAIBHAI PARMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A person having a shop on the Makarpura Road at Baroda for selling milk charged with having stored or sold an article of food namely milk which was adulterated pleaded guilty and was convicted for an offence under sec. 16(1)(a)(i) read with sec. 7(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act of 1954. He was sentenced to suffer imprisonment till rising of the Court and to pay a fine of Rs. 450.00 by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class (Muni.) Baroda Shri M P. Shah. The sentence was considered prima facie inadequate and a suo motu notice was issued by the High Court to opponent Dahyabhai Desaibhai Parmar to show cause why the sentence imposed by the trial Court should not be enhanced. The opponent did not appear in response to the notice.

(2.) The record shows that the milk which was purchased from the shop of the opponent was adulterated as alleged. The report of the public Analyst is at Ex. 7 and it shows that the sample contained extraneous water to the extent of 11.0% and there was a fat deficiency of 64.51%. It is clear that the milk sold by the opponent is very much inferior in quality. In the first place extraneous water to the extent of 11.0% has been added. In the second place the fat deficiency is of a very High order namely of the order of 64.51%. It is a matter therefore of which a serious view in regard to sentence should be taken. The grounds given by the learned Magistrate for imposing lenient sentence are contained in paragraph (5) of the judgment which reads as under : Moreover the accused is a poor man. He is repenting for this offence. He assured for not to commit such offence again. There are 12 members in his family. He has small children and except himself there is no earning member in his family. Now- a-days he is not doing well with his business. His family has to starve without his income because these days are very hard days as it is an year of famine and hence the accused has prayed for mercy. Considering the mitigating circumstance of the accused I think that the sentence of T.R.C. and heavy fine will meet the ends of justice and serve the purpose In the result I pass the following order.

(3.) The revision application is allowed. The sentence imposed by the learned Magistrate is enhanced from imprisonment till rising of the Court to rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months. The sentence of fine will remain. Warrant for arrest shall issue. Sentence enhanced.