LAWS(ALL)-2000-5-176

PRATAP CHANDRA Vs. STATE OF U P

Decided On May 10, 2000
PRATAP CHANDRA Appellant
V/S
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) J. C. Mishra, J. The revisionist has challenged his conviction under Section 7/16 of Prevention of Food Adultaration Act recorded by Munsif Magistrate, Farrukhabad and award of sentence of one year rigorous imprisonment and to fine of Rs. 2,000. The appeal filed by the revisionist was dismissed by I Additional Sessions Judge, Farrukhabad by order dated 9-8-84.

(2.) THE learned Counsel for the revisionist Sri Dileep Kumar has pressed this revision on the question of sentence. He contended that the alleged adultera tion was made on 14-6-79 and since more than twenty years have passed. THE ends of justice required that the revisionist may not be sent to jail. I find force in this contention.

(3.) IN view of the facts stated above provisionally instead of sentence of six months simple imprisonment, the revisionist is sentenced to a fine of Rs. 6,000 including the sentence of fine imposed by the trial Court for offence punishable under Section 7/16 of the Act on account of the pulse being adul terated and Rs. 1,000 including fine for viola tion of Rule 50 with the direction to the revisionist to deposit the fine imposed in the trial Court within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the notice from the Court of Magistrate concerned and to apprise the State Government that the amount has been deposited with a copy of receipt and copy of this order. The revisionist on doing so need not birdseed The State Government on receipt of the copy of the order and receipt evidencing deposit of fine may for malise the commutation in terms of the direction given by the Supreme Court in the cases referred to above.