MAKRAND Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The learned counsel for the revisionist has pressed this revision on the question of sentence. It has been contended that the alleged adulteration was made in the year 1979 and it would not be proper to send the accused to jail after 21 years. I find force in this contention.

(2.) In terms of the order passed by the Supreme Court in Badri Prasad Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, 1996 SCC (Crl) 79 followed by this Bench in Criminal Revision No. 2100 of 1984 Sohan Singh alias Sworn 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 had taken long before I find it a fit case to award simple imprisonment and, therefore, the rigorous imprisonment awarded by the Magistrate and confirmed by the appellate court is altered to minimum period but of simple imprisonment.