STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. MOHAN LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 21.4.79 passed by Shri M.A.A. Khan, Additional Sessions Judge, Sri Ganganagar (as His Lordship then was), in Criminal Appeal No. 51/76.

(2.) Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the Food Inspector Ganganagar, took a sample of Jalebi weighing 15 gms. from the accused- respondent's possession who was found selling such sweet-meats on his shop situated in Dhan-Mandi, Ganganagar, on 11.11.72 at about 11.55 A.M. The Sample was duly packed and sealed as per the Rules. A sample was sent to the Public Analyst for examination, and, vide Ex.P 3, it was confirmed that the sample contained non-permitted Colter Dye and as such it was injurious to the public health. Consequently, the Food Inspector of Ganganagar, filed a complaint under Sec. 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (for short "the Act"), the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ganganagar. The accused-respondent was tried by the Chief Judicial Magistrate and, after trial, holding the sample of the Jalebi to be adulterated, held the accused-respondent guilty of commission of an offence punishable under Sec. 7/16 of the Act, and, sentenced him to 6 months' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1000.00, in default of payment of fine, he was further required to undergo one months' R.I. Being aggrieved, accused-petitioner filed an appeal No. 51/76 in the court of Sessions Judge, Ganganagar, which was further transferred to the court of Additional Sessions Judge, Sri Ganganagar, and consequently, the same was decided vide judgment dated 15.3.77 and the same was accepted and the case was remanded to the trial court to afford an opportunity to the accused-respondent to be heard in regard to award of sentence as mandated by the Provisions of Sec. 248(2), Crimial P.C. However, this order of remand was challenged by way of Criminal Revision (S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 262/77), before the High Court and the same was accepted vide order dated 18.11.78 and, accepting the revision petition, it was ordered that the appellate Court itself would afford an opportunity to the accused- respondent to be heard, as required by the provisions of Sec. 248(2), Cr.PC., and pass an appropriate order according to the Law.

(3.) As a result, the learned presiding Judge of the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, vide his impugned judgment and order dated 21.4.79, while confirming the judgment of the trial court as regards the conviction of the accused- respondent under Sec. 7/16 of the RF.A. Act, 1954, set aside the sentence of imprisonment and fine imposed on the accused-respondent and, instead, ordered to accused appellant (before the appellate Court) to be released on a probation of good conduct for a period of two years on furnishing of bail bonds in sum of Rs. 1,000.00each. Accordingly, accused-appellant furnished required bail bonds on 21.4.79 itself.