CHOTE LALA Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is directed against the judgment and order dated 6.9.84 passed by VI Additional Sessions Judge, Jhansi maintaining the conviction of the appellant under Sec. 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act while modifying the sentence imposed by Judicial Magistrate (Economic offences), Jhansi and reducing the sentence of imprisonment from six months to three months and to fine of Rs. 1000/while maintaining the sentence of fine. The learned Counsel for the revisionist complained violation of Sec. 13 (2) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and further contended that the solitary testimony of Food Inspector was not sufficient to prove its case. The courts below have discussed all the pleas raised before them and without repeating the argument I do not find any merit in this contention. I find that the accused was rightly convicted.

(2.) The fact remains that the alleged adulteration was made in the year 1981. About 19 years elapsed. In these circumstances I do not find it a fit case to send the accused to jail. In terms of the order passed by the Supreme Court in Badri Prasad Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, 1996 SCC (Criminal) 79 , followed by this Bench in Criminal Revision No. 2100 of 1984 Sohan Singh @ Swarn Singh Vs. State of U.P. I modify the sentence awarded as under :

(3.) Considering the nature of the accusation and also the fact that the offence hall taken long before I find it a fit case to award simple imprisonment and, therefore, they rigorous imprisonment awarded by the Magistrate and confirmed by the appellate court is altered to minimum period but of simple imprisonment.