SHER SINGH Vs. STATE OF U.T. CHANDIGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER , who is present in Court, has been heard. He has stated that in view of his application moved by him today, lenient treatment may be given to him as he does not intend to contest the revision petition on merits.

(2.) PETITIONER has filed this revision petition against judgment and order dated 27.7.1988, vide which he was convicted for offence under Section 16(1)(a)(i) read with Section 7(1) of Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (in short the Act) and was ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and also to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-. It was further ordered that in case of default of payment of fine, he will further undergo RI for two months. Petitioner went in appeal which was dismissed by the appellate court below. That judgment is also under challenge in this revision petition.

(3.) IT is not necessary to go into details of this case as petitioner, who is present in Court, has moved an application, wherein he has stated that he had been facing the agony of trial, appeal and now pending revision petition, for the last more than 14 years. Sword of conviction had been hanging over his head. He was not a previous convict and nothing adverse exists against him till date. After his conviction, he has settled in life and got married in the year 1993 and now he had two minor sons. He had already remained behind the bars for a period of 25 days. By stating all these facts, he prayed that his sentence be reduced.