J. N. BHATT, J. ( 1 ) THE respondents are the original accused persons who came to be tried by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate at Bhavnagar for the offences punishable under Sections 3 and 5 of (The) Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act 1978 (`the Act for short) in Criminal Case No. 1199 of 1984. ( 2 ) THE accused persons pleaded guilty to the charges upon which the accused persons came to be convicted for the aforesaid offences and each of the accused is sentenced to a fine of Rs. 500 and in default to undergo 30 days rigorous imprisonment The documents were ordered to be returned to be accused persons. Being aggrieved by the said order of sentence the appellate-State has come up in this appeal for enhancement of the sentence by invoking the aids of the provisions of Section 377 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 (`the Code for short hereinafter) considering the peculiar facts and circumstances and the intervening time-lag which is more than ten years there will be no justification for ordering enhancement of the sentence awarded by the Trial Court. ( 3 ) THE accused persons were charged for having committed offences punishable under Sections 3 and 5 of the Act it would be therefore necessary to refer the said provision. Section 3 of the Act prescribes that no person shall promote or conduct any prize chit or money circulation scheme or enroll as a member to any such chit or scheme or participate in it otherwise or receive or remit any money in pursuance of such chit or scheme. Section 4 of the Act prescribes penalty for contravening the provisions of Section 3 Section 4 of the Act reads as under:"4 Penalty for contravening the provisions of Section 3-Whoever contravenes the provisions of Section 3 shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years or with fine which may extend to five thousand rupees or with both: provided that in the absence of special and adequate reasons to the contrary to be mentioned in the judgment of the court the imprisonment shall not be less than one year and the line shall not be less than one thousand rupees". ( 4 ) THE prosecution commenced on the basis of a complaint filed by one Krishnalal Purshotam Sompura. ( 4 ) THE prosecution commenced on the basis of a complaint filed by one Krishnalal Purshotam Sompura. According to the said complaint the accused persons had given one advertisement on 12. 1 which was deceptive and false in the name of Satyam Enterprise Lokhand Bazar Bhavnagar declaring prizes. It was also declared in the said advertisement that the winner would be given National Savings Certificate of full amount Thus it was contended that the accused persons deceived and falsely attracted the public money by giving false advertisement. Upon the investigation it was found that the said finn was running without any permit or licence of the Government or competent authority. On completion of the investigation the accused persons were found to have committed offences punishable under Sections 3 and 5 of the Act and therefore they were charge-sheeted accordingly. Since they pleaded guilty they were imposed the aforesaid order of sentence ( 5 ) NO doubt prima facie it can safely be concluded that considering the nature and gravity of the offences under Sections 3 and 5 the learned Trial Magistrate took a view which cannot be said to be unjust or perverse. Special reasons are also recorded. Therefore taking into account all these aspects and the intervening time-lag which is more than 9 years it would not be advisable and expedient at this juncture to interfere with the impugned order of sentence in this appeal under Section 377 of the Code. Therefore this appeal is required to be dismissed being meritless. In the result this appeal is dismissed. Application Dismissed. .