RAM CHAND Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was tried, convicted and sentence to simple imprisonment for six months and a fine of Rs. 1,000. in default further simple imprisonment for one month under section 16(1)(a)(i) of the prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, by the trial Court. His conviction and sentence were upheld by the lower appellate Court. The petitioner came up in revision to this Court. The revision was admitted by M.M. Punchhi, J., vide his order dated 24th February, 1983, and since then he has been on bail under the orders of this Court.

(2.) THE sample of tea leaves in this case was allegedly taken from the petitioner in the year 1978. According to the report of the public Analyst, 3 iron filings measuring 1.9 mm, 2. lmm and about 1mm were detected in the sample and the total iron filings in the sample were 25 per million.

(3.) THE petitioner has been undergoing the agony of trial since the year 1978. As observed earlier, he has been on baril since February, 1983. I do not think that there is any point in sending him to Jail again. I am of the view that it is a fit case where the awarding of the minimum sentence prescribed under the law should be dispensed with and provision of the Probation of Offenders Act should be pressed into service. Accordingly, I suspend the sentence awarded to the petitioner and order that he be released on probation on his furnishing within two months to the satisfaction of the trial Court a bond in the sum of two thousand rupees with one surety in the like amount to keep the peace and be of good behaviour for a period of one year and to appear to receive sentence when called upon to do so in the meantime. However, the fine is converted into costs of the proceedings payable by the petitioner to the State. With this modification the revision fails and is dismissed.