STATE Vs. SHRIKANT MARUTI BARKAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by the State for enhancement of the sentence passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate, Esplanade, Bombay, convicting the accused under Sec. 18(a)(ii), 18(b) and 18(c) read with Sec. 27 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act and sentencing him to pay a fine of Rs. 75.00.

(2.) The accused having pleaded guilty to the charge the learned Magistrate accepted that plea and convicted and sentenced him as just stated. The State has filed this appeal for enhancement. If the conviction is for the offence under section 18(a)(ii), 18(b) and 18(c), as the charge indicates, then no doubt the sentence awarded has got to be interfered with. But since the case is of contravention of the provisions of Chapter 4 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act in respect of cosmetics and not drug, section 27 is not attracted and therefore the charge to which he pleaded guilty is clearly defective. Since we are concerned with the cosmetic, the penal provision which is attracted is section 27-A and that section provides for imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year or with fine. Hence no case is made out for interfering with the order of sentence, as it cannot be said to be grossly inadequate.

(3.) The appeal is, therefore, dismissed.