JUDGMENT 1. - Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. It was contended on behalf of the petitioner that the sentence of six months rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 100/ is excessive. It was also contended that the incident is of 26-5-1967 and that it would be harsh at this stage to send the petitioner to Judicial Custody. Reliance was placed in A. I. R. 1975 Supreme Court Page 845, where benefit of Probation of offenders Act was granted. 2. There is concurrent findings of fact by both the Courts below that the milk sold by the applicant was adulterated. It has been held that it contains about 48% of added water. Having carefully considered that the judgment of both the learned Lower Courts no case is made out justifying any inference on the revisional stage. 3. The revision petition has no force and is therefore dismissed in limine. *******