KRISHAN KUMAR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was tried convicted and sentenced to one years's rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1,500/ -, in default further six months' rigorous imprisonment, under section 16 (1) (a) (i) read with section 7 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act by the trial Court. He carried the appeal to the Court of Session where it failed substantially inasmuch as only the sentence of imprisonment was reduced from one year to six months. The petitioner came up in revision in this Court. The same was admitted by M.M. Punchhi, J. vide his order dated 18th July, 1983.

(2.) MR . Amarjit Markan, learned counsel for the petitioner, has not addressed me on the merits. He submits that the petitioner is not a previous convict, that he was only 17 to 18 years old at the time of the alleged commission of the offence, that the offence was committed in the year 1981, that since then he has been facing the ordeal of trial and that he has been on bail under the orders of this Court since 18th July, 1983. According to the report of the Public Analyst, there was no deficiency in the milk fats. However, there was a slight deficiency in the milk solids not fat. Therefore, he prays for leniency in the sentence. I feel no useful purpose could be served by sending this young man to jail at this stage. I, therefore, dispense with the awarding of the minimum sentence provided under the law. Consequently I reduce the sentence of imprisonment of the petitioner from six months to the period already undergone by him. However, his sentence of fine and imprisonment in lieu thereof would remain undisturbed. But for this modification this revision fails and is hereby dismissed. Petition dismissed.