Short Note : 1. This revision application is directed against the applicant's conviction and the sentence of six months' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1000 under section 7 (1) read with section 16 (1) (a) (i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ujjain. 2. Held : The applicant no doubt contended that he was not the owner of the shop from where the milk was purchased but even if this be accepted as correct, even then the fact remains that milk was sold by the applicant only to the Food Inspector against payment or its price and if the milk sold by the applicant was found to be adulterated, then certainly he would be liable to the punishment for its selling. In this connection it may be noted that according to Parasram (PW 2) of the Municipal Corporation Ujjain, the applicant is a licensed milk vendor and has been given a token for the same. The applicant, therefore, cannot contend that he was not the milk vender as pleaded in this case. The conviction of the applicant in these circumstances was, in my opinion, fully justified. 3. So far as the question of sentence is concerned, it is clear that the offence is dated 16-2-1970. The applicant has undergone imprisonment twice-one after his conviction by the trial Court and then after his appeal was dismissed by the appellate Court on 6-11-1975. Though he was granted bail by order of this Court dated 7-11-1975 but he was released on bail on 10-11-1975. The question is as to whether the applicant should be re-committed to prison to serve out the remaining sentence after more than 81/2 years from the date when the aforesaid sample was taken. If the deficiency in the solid non fat contents had been considerable, then certainly the accused could have been directed to suffer full term of the sentence but in this case the deficiency was only in respect of solid non fat contents, and that too by 0.52 per cent. The fat contents, according to the report of the Public Analyst, were 8.0 per cent as against the required 5.0 per cent. Considering all these facts, I think if the sentence of imprisonment already undergone is maintained, and the sentence of fine is raised from Rs. 1000 to Rs. 2000, then it would meet the ends of justice. The fat contents, according to the report of the Public Analyst, were 8.0 per cent as against the required 5.0 per cent. Considering all these facts, I think if the sentence of imprisonment already undergone is maintained, and the sentence of fine is raised from Rs. 1000 to Rs. 2000, then it would meet the ends of justice. Sentence of imprisonment reduced. Revision dismissed.