STATE OF U P Vs. CHAND SEN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) U. S. Tripathi, J. The State of U. P. has preferred this revision against the judgment and order dated 21-6-1984 passed by the Sessions Judge, Jalaun at Orai, in Criminal Appeal No. 35 of 1984 dismissing the appeal filed by the opposite party, but releasing him on' Probation of good conduct under Section 4 of U. P. First Offenders Probation Act on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of Rs. 2. 000/- for a period of one year and reduc ing the fine of Rs. 1,000/- to Rs. 200.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that on 7-5-1979 at about 11. 30 a. m. the op posite party had exposed for sale mustard oil in his shop at Kasha Madhogarh, dis trict Jalaun. THE Food Inspector suspected adulteration and took sample of mustard oil. One of the sample was sent for chemi cal analysis. On analysis the sample was found adulterated. THEreafter, Food In spector filed complaint alter obtaining usual sanction. THE opposite party was tried for the offence punishable under Sec tions 7/16 (1) (a) (i) of Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954. In the trial, the learned Magistrate found that offence against the opposite party was proved and therefore, he convicted him under Sec tions 7/16 (1) (a) (i) of Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and sentenced him to undergo R. I. for a period of six months and fine of Rs. 1,000. THE opposite party preferred Criminal Appeal No. 35 of 1984 against his conviction and sentence in the Court of Sessions Judge, Jalaun at Oral. Before the Appellate Court the appeal was not pressed on merit, but only request for releasing the opposite party on probation was made. THE learned Sessions Judge was of the view that in view of the facts and circumstances of the case as well as young age of the opposite party and the fact that there was no previous bad antecedents the end of justice would meet, if the opposite party may be given chance to maintain peace and be of good conduct. With these findings, he dismissed the appeal and confirmed the conviction of the opposite party, but instead of sending him to jail, he directed that he shall be released on probation of good con duct under Section 4 of U. P. First Offenders Probation Act on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the sum of Rs. 2,000/- for a period of one year for good conduct and behaviour during the period of one year and fine imposed by the trial Court was reduced to Rs. 200.

(3.) THE only question, which arises for determination in this revision is whether the opposite party was entitled to benefit of Section 4 of U. P. First Offenders Proba tion Act.