SHYAM LAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS case has been referred to a larger Bench by a learned Single Judge. The question involved is one relating to the effect on pending proceeding of an amending Act which gives discretion to the Court in imposing a lesser punishment than that prescribed in the original Act.

(2.) THE applicant had a tea stall and he used to store milk for the purpose of making tea which he served to his customers. The Food Inspector purchased a sample of milk from him which was found to be adulterated by the Public Analyst. He was prosecuted under Section 7 (I) read with Section 16 (1) (a) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (Act 37 of 1954), hereinafter referred to as the 'principal Act' Since the offence alleged to have been committed by him was a second offence, he rendered himself liable to imprisonment for a term extending to two years and with fine but which punishment could not be less than one year together with fine of not less than Rs 2,000 as laid down in Section 16 (i) (ii) of the Principal Act.

(3.) THE offence charged had been committed on 28-9-1964 and the applicant was convicted and sentenced on 4-8-1965 to one year's rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 2,000, in default of payment of fine to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months. The learned Sessions Judge affirmed the said conviction and sentence in appeal. The applicant filed an application in revision in this Court and the main contention raised on behalf of the applicant before the learned Single Judge was that the Legislature had amended Section 16 (i) of the principal Act by the amending Act of 1965 which came into force on 1st March, 1965 and that by reason of the said amendment it was open to the Magistrate, in exercise of his discretion, to impose a sentence of imprisonment for a term of less than six months or of fine of less than Rs. 1,000 if in his opinion the circumstances of the case did not require the imposition of a higher punishment.