SATISH KUMAR Vs. UNION TERRITORY, CHANDIGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRESENT revision petition has been preferred by Satish Kumar son of Raghu Nath. He was tried by the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chandigarh, and convicted & sentenced under Section 16(1) (a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default whereof to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months.

(2.) AGGRIEVED against the same, petitioner had filed an appeal. The appeal was dismissed by the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge, Chandigarh.

(3.) MR . Atul Lakhanpal, Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. S.S. Rana, Advocate, has stated that he will not be assailing the conviction of the petitioner as two Courts below after appreciation of evidence have come to conclusion that petitioner is guilty of offence under Section 16(1)(a)(i) of the Act. Counsel further submits that petitioner has suffered a protracted trial of 20 years. In the order determining quantum of sentence, it was noticed that petitioner is a sole bread winner of his family and having young children and old aged parents. It has been further submitted that in the order it was also noticed that petitioner is first offender. Counsel further submits that after conviction, petitioner has committed no other offence. Counsel further submits that children of the petitioner are of marriageable age and in case petitioner is sent behind the bars, their matrimonial prospects will suffer. Counsel further submits that taking into consideration protracted trial, the antecedents, and the fact that petitioner has committed no offence after conviction, sentence awarded upon the petitioner be reduced to already undergone.