PAUL MASIH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition was filed by Paul Masih impugning his conviction under sections 27(1) (ii) and 28 of the Drugs and Cosmeties Act for which offence he was ordered to undergo two years' rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/ -, in default of payment of fine to undergo further rigorous imprisonment of four months. The appeal filed by the petitioner against his conviction and sentence recorded by the trial Court was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Ferozepur. Notice in the present revision petition was issued at the motion stage only in regard to sentence. Even otherwise the prosecution has produced enough material on the record to establish that on 21.9.1981 a raid was conducted by Bhagwan Singh, Drugs Inspector who was accompanied by Dr Vijay Kumar Sharma, District Health Officer, Ferozepur and Ved Parkash Peon, at the shop of the petitioner where he was found to be in possession of some allopathic drugs. The petitioner was not able to produce any licence or certificate authorising him to stock or sell the allopathic drugs. He was consequently prosecuted and sentenced as already sated. The conviction of the petitioner under section 27(1) (ii) and 28 of that Drug and Cosmetics Act is therefore, confirmed.

(2.) AS regards the sentence, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner was in fact working as a Compounder to one Dr. Kashmiri Lal a Medical Practitioner, who had got a registeration certificate Exhibit D -2 as per which he was authorised to practice as an Ayurvedic and Unani Practitioner. It was also contended that the said Dr. Kashmiri Lal while appearing as a defence witness in this case had an heart attack in the Court and ultimately expired. The son of Dr. Kashmiri Lal was then produced as a defence witness and he testified about his father being a registered medical practitioner. On account of these circumstances, the submission made is that only a nominal punishment would meet the ends of justice. I am inclined to agree with the learned counsel in this behalf. The petitioner has by now undergone a confinement of more than one month. The sentence of imprisonment imposed upon the petitioner is accordingly reduced to the period of confinement already undergone by him. However, the petitioner is ordered to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/ -, and in default of payment thereof to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. If this fine is paid, the petitioner shall be released forthwith. The revision is accepted to the extent indicated above.