LAWS(ALL)-1976-11-65

BRIJRAJ SINGH Vs. STATE

Decided On November 24, 1976
BRIJRAJ SINGH Appellant
V/S
STATE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision was admitted on the question of sentence alone. It arises out of conviction and sentence awarded to the revisionist under Sec. 7/16, Prevention of Food Adulteration Act to undergo six months' R.I. as well as to pay a line of Rs. 1000.00 and in default of payment of line, to undergo six months' R.I.

(2.) The present revisionist was found selling milk of cow without a licence on 3rd Feb., 1971 at about 11.30 a.m. Food Inspector S.C. Agrawal purchased 6.60 m. Is. of milk as sample and he paid 75 paise as price of the milk. Relevant documents were prepared. The sample was divided in to three parts and was sealed into seperate bottles to which 18 drops of formaline 40% strength in each of them was mixed. Thereafter the sample was sent to the Public Analyst and no analysis it transpired that the milk was deficient in non fatty solids content by about 18%. A copy of the Public Analyst's report was given to the revisionist. Thereafter, a complaint was filed in the court of the city Magistrate by the Executive Officer, Municipal Board, Etawah on the basis of which the accused was asked to stand his trial under Sec. 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. The defence of the accused was denial. The magistrate found that the prosecution story was fully made out and as such he convicted and sentenced the revisionist as above. The appeal preferred by the revisionist was also dismissed, and the learned Sessions Judge confirmed the conviction and sentence awarded to the revisionist by the trial court.

(3.) Learned counsel for the revisionist urged before me that at the time of admission he was asked to deposit a sum of Rs. 500.00 as fine. The accused has already been behind the bars for 15 to 20 days. I would, therefore, while dismissing the revision on the point of conviction reduce the sentence to the period already undergone. In my view, payment of Rs. 500.00 will be adequate to meet the end of justice. Since the fine had been deposited, nothing further remains to be-done in this revision. The accused is on bail, lie need not surrender. Elis bail bonds are cancelled and sureties are discharged. Revision dismissed.