BIRENDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGE in this criminal revision petition is to the judgment dated 25.7.2006, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sonepat, whereby the appeal filed by the petitioner challenging his conviction and sentence dated 3.3.2006, for the offence punishable under Section 7 read with Section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (for brevity, 'the Act') recorded by the learned Sub -Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Gohana, was dismissed.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner at the very outset submits that in view of concurrent findings recorded by both the learned Courts below, he does not want to challenge the conviction of the petitioner. However, he submits that in view of the statement recorded under Section 313, Cr.P.C., the petitioner was of 21 years of age as on 30.5.2003 and, thus, less than 18 years of age on the date of sampling i.e. 26.5.1999, and, as such, the provisions of Section 20AA of the Act would be applicable and the petitioner is entitled to be released on probation.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the State has not controverted the factual aspect that in his statement recorded under Section 313, Cr.P.C., the petitioner has given his age to be 21 years, which was recorded about three years after the date of sampling and, as such, the petitioner was approximately 18 years of age on the date of sampling. However, he submits that the learned Courts below have already taken a lenient view and awarded rigorous imprisonment of six months besides payment of fine of Rs. 1,000/ -, therefore, there is no scope for further reduction of sentence in the present case.