JUDGMENT P.N. Bakshi, J. - The applicant has been convicted under Sections 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and sentenced to 6 months' R.I. and a fine of Rs. 1000/-. In default of payment of fine he was to undergo 3 months' R.I. His conviction and sentence has been maintained in appeal by the Sessions Judge, Agra. Hence this revision, which was admitted on the question of sentence. 2. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant and have also perused the impugned orders. 3. According to the prosecution case a sample of milk was purchased by the Food Inspector from the applicant on 20th June 1976 at 7 A.M. in accordance with the procedure prescribed by law. One of the sample phials was sent for analysis to the Public Analyst, whose report disclosed that it was deficient in fat contents by 20 percent and in non-fatty solids by 22 per cent, judged on the standard of buffalo milk. After obtaining the sanction, the applicant has been prosecuted and convicted as above. 4. Both the courts below have concurrently held the prosecution case established. There is no illegality or perversity in the findings of fact recorded by the subordinate courts. This revision was admitted on the question of sentence only. The extent of adulteration is to the extent of 20 per cent in fat contents and 21 percent non-fatty solids. The adulteration in milk is becoming very common and deserves to be suppressed with stiff hands. In these circumstances, the sentence, which has been awarded by the courts below appears to be reasonable. 5. There is no merit in this revision, which is hereby dismissed. The applicant is on bail. He shall be taken into custody forthwith to serve out the unexpired portion of the sentence of imprisonment. The interim order, passed by this court on 31st August, 1979 staying realisation of fine is hereby vacated.