JUDGMENT 1. - This revision petition is directed against the judgment of learned Sessions Judge, Balotra dated 16th May, 1984 whereby the conviction of the petitioner u/s. 7/16 and sentence of six months S.I. with a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default of payment of fine two months S.I. passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate by his order dated 22-4-81 was confirmed. 2. Mr. Suresh Kumbhat, learned counsel for the petitioner has not challenged the conviction of the petitioner. However, he has submitted that the incident is of the year 1980 and more than 11 years have passed, so a lenient view may be taken as sentence. 3. Mrs. Chandralekha, learned Public Prosecutor has not been able to controvert the facts. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. Though in such anti-social matters, the courts should be reluctant in interference but looking to the fact that the incident is of 12-2-1980 and the accused has remained in jail for some time and also suffered mental agony during this period, in my opinion, no useful purpose will be served if the accused petitioner is again sent to jail to serve out the remaining period of sentence. Under these circumstances, I am of the view that the ends of justice will be served while maintaining the conviction of the petitioner, the sentence of imprisonment is reduced to the period already undergone. 5. In the result, this revision petition is partly allowed. The conviction of the petitioner u/s. 7/16 of Prevention of Food Adulteration Act is maintained. The sentence of imprisonment is reduced to the period already undergone. The sentence of fine is also maintained. Three months time is allowed to deposit the same, failing which the trial court will proceed according to law. The petitioner is already on bail, so he need not surrender and his bonds are discharged.Revision allowed. *******