SITA RAM Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) KRISHNA Kumar, J. This revision has been filed against the judgment and order 28-8-1986 passed by the Sessions Judge, Lalitpur whereby dismissing the appeal and confirming the judgment and order of the learned Magistrate whereby the learned Magistrate held the accused-appellant guilty for the offence under Sec tion 7 (l) (b)/16 (l) (a) of the Food Adul teration Act and the accused was sen tenced for one year's rigorous imprison ment and fine of Rs. 2,000:

(2.) LEARNED Counsel for the revisionist contended that the case is pending against the revisionist since 1984 and for the last 16 years the revisionist was suffering because of this litigation. It is contended that the revisionist was manufacturing ice-cream candy and in the ice-cream it was found that there was prohibited colour and saccharin. He fur ther contended that revisionist was in jail for the about one and a half months and it is prayed that the sentence may be modified and instead of rigorous im prisonment the fine may be enhanced.

(3.) HOWEVER the sentence is modified to the extent that instead of rigorous im prisonment the revisionist shall pay the fine of Rs. 5,000 within one month from today. The fine already paid shall be ad justed. In case the fine is not deposited within the time stipulated, the revisionist shall undergo the sentence already passed