S. R. K. PRASAD, J. ( 1 ) THIS appeal preferred under Sec. 377 (1) cr. P. C. 1973 (New Code) against the judgment in Criminal Case No. 2 of 1998, rendered by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, mobile Court, Bhadrachalam convicting and sentencing the accused to pay a fine of rs. 1,100/- in default to undergo S. I. for three months for the offence under Sec. 16 (1) (a) (i) and 2 (ia) (m), 7 (i) and (iv) of Prevention of food Adulteration Act for the sale of non- iodized salt. ( 2 ) THE respondent who is the accused has admitted the offence before the Sub- divisional Magistrate, Mobile Court, bhadrachalam at the time of his examination in C. C. No. 2 of 1998. Thereupon, the Sub- divisional Magistrate found her guilty and convicted and sentenced to pay a fine of rs. l,100/-in default to undergo S. I. for three months against the accused who belongs to s. T. Koya community. On 17-3-1998, the prosecutor has preferred this appeal regarding the adequacy of the sentence awarded, before this Court under new provisions of Cr. P. C. 1973 (New Code ). It is not in dispute that Tekulaboru village, is situated in Agency area of Konavaram mandal in Khammam District. It is an undisputed fact that new provisions of cr. P. C. , are not applicable to the agency tracts of Andhra Pradesh viz. , agency areas in Khammam District, East Godavari District, visakhapatnam District and Srikakulamand vizianagaram Districts. It is most unfortunate thing that the fruit of the promise of separation of judiciary from the Executive has not been handed over to the people residing in agency area on the sole ground that they happened to be tribals. Time has come to fulfill the promise made under article 50 of Constitution of India regarding the separation of judiciary from executive and treating the tribals as equal Citizens of india with that of the plain areas. It is better to put an end to discrimination and duel treatment given to the tribals and non-tribals by applying different kinds of Cr. P. Cs. for the similar type of offences. Under N. D. P. S. Act tribals from agency areas are tried under new Cr. P. C. due to special enactment. It is better to put an end to discrimination and duel treatment given to the tribals and non-tribals by applying different kinds of Cr. P. Cs. for the similar type of offences. Under N. D. P. S. Act tribals from agency areas are tried under new Cr. P. C. due to special enactment. I also state that it may affect the right to equal treatment by the State Government and it may affect the fundamental rights conferred to tribals under Article 14 of the Constitution of India. ( 3 ) STRANGELY, the public prosecutor has presented the appeal by invoking the new cr. P. C. 1973. Obviously, Section 377 Cr. P. C. has no application to entertain this appeal. ( 4 ) BE that as it may, this Court does not want to dispose of the same on short cut method. The Court has ample power under old Cr. P. C. 1898 (5 of 1898) to entertain revision and peruse the legality and correctness of the judicial proceedings conducted by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, mobile Court, Bhadrachalam area. It is mainly contended by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent that the provisions of section 13 (1) of the Act, are not followed by serving a copy of the analyst report and thereby, the respondent is deprived of the right to send the analyst report to the Central food Laboratory. It is also further contended that the accused who is a female has been lured by false promise to admit the offence, which led to imposing a lenient punishment and which amounted to plea of bargain and the same is prohibited under law. It is also further contended that the manufacturer s name has been found on the property seized. Hence, the accused cannot be made responsible for the alleged offence since the name of manufacturer, is admitted to have been disclosed. ( 5 ) THE learned public prosecutor contends that the punishment imposed is very lenient. He is unable to state whether a copy of analyst report has been served or not. Hence, the accused cannot be made responsible for the alleged offence since the name of manufacturer, is admitted to have been disclosed. ( 5 ) THE learned public prosecutor contends that the punishment imposed is very lenient. He is unable to state whether a copy of analyst report has been served or not. ( 6 ) ADVERTING to the rival contentions, it is stated in Trippeswarmy v. State of Karnataka, at paragraph 1 as follows:"we are of the view that this is a case in which plea-bargaining seems to have taken place, because on the appellant pleading guilty to the charge, the learned magistrate imposed upon him only a sentence of fine of Rs. 1,000/- even though the offence of which he was convicted was one under Sec. 304-A of the Penal code. The High Court, in appeal by the state, acting upon the plea of guilty, maintained the sentence of fine and additionally imposed a substantive sentence of rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year. It is obvious that by reason of plea-bargaining the appellant pleaded guilty and did not avail of the opportunity to defend himself against the charge, which is a course he would certainly not have followed if he had known that he would not be let off with a mere sentence of fine but would be sentenced to imprisonment. It would be clearly violative of Article 21 of the constitution of India to induce or lead an accused to plead guilty under a promise or assurance that he would be let off lightly and then in appeal or revision, to enhance the sentence. Of course when we say this, we do not for a moment wish to suggest that the court of appeal or revision should not interfere where a disproportionately low sentence is imposed on the accused as a result of plea-bargaining. But in such a case, it would not be reasonable, fair just to act on the plea of guilty for the purpose of enhancing the sentence. The Court of appeal or revision should, in such a case, set aside the conviction and sentence of the accused and remand the case to the trial Court so that the accused can, if he so wishes, defend himself against the charge and if he is found guilty, proper sentence can be passed against him". The Court of appeal or revision should, in such a case, set aside the conviction and sentence of the accused and remand the case to the trial Court so that the accused can, if he so wishes, defend himself against the charge and if he is found guilty, proper sentence can be passed against him". ( 7 ) PLEA of bargain has been once again considered in the decision reported in ganeshmal Jashraj v. Government of Gujarat and another, relevant portion of which reads as follows:"the principal contention advanced on behalf of the appellant was that though the learned Judicial Magistrate considered the evidence led on behalf of the prosecution and did not act solely on the admission of guilt made by the appellant, his approach to the evidence was coloured by the admission of guilt and since the admission of guilt was not made by the appellant at the stage of making his plea before the commencement of the prosecution evidence, but only after the prosecution evidence was closed and he had already been examined under Section 313 of the code of Criminal Procedure, the conviction was vitiated. Now, it is true that when the appellant was called upon to make his plea before the commencement of the prosecution evidence, he pleaded not guilty in respect of the offence charged against him and it was only after the prosecution evidence was closed and his examination under section 313 of the Code of Criminal procedure was completed that he admitted guilt presumably as a result of plea bargaining. The learned Judicial magistrate was in the circumstances not entitled to take into account the admission of guilt made by the appellant in reaching his decision in the regard to the conviction of the appellant. The learned Judicial Magistrate, it is true, did not base his order of conviction solely on the admission of guilt made by the appellant, but it is clear from his judgment that his conclusion was not unaffected by the admission of guilt on the part of the appellant. The learned Judicial Magistrate, it is true, did not base his order of conviction solely on the admission of guilt made by the appellant, but it is clear from his judgment that his conclusion was not unaffected by the admission of guilt on the part of the appellant. There can be no doubt that when there is an admission of guilt made by the accused as a result of plea bargaining or otherwise, the evaluation of the evidence by the Court is likely to become a little superficial and perfunctory and the Court may be disposed to refer to the evidence not critically with a view to assessing its credibility but mechanically as a matter of formality in support of the admission of guilt. The entire approach of the Court to the assessment of the evidence would be likely to be different when there is an admission of guilt by the accused. Here it is obvious that the approach of the learned Judicial Magistrate was affected by the admission of guilt made by the appellant and in the circumstances, it would not be right to sustain the conviction of the appellant. 5. We accordingly allow the appeal, set aside the order of the High Court enhancing the sentence imposed on the appellant as also the Order of the learned judicial Magistrate convicting the appellant and remand the case to the learned Judicial Magistrate so that he may proceed further from the stage of examination under Section 313 of the code of Criminal Procedure and dispose of the case on the base of the evidence led on behalf of the prosecution and if the appellant chooses to lead any evidence in defence, then after taken into account such further evidence also and without in any manner being affected or (@ page sc 266) influenced by the admission of guilt made by the appellant. 6. Before we part with this case, we must regretfully observe, and this was not disputed by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State, that most of the cases of food adulteration which come to the Courts are cases directed against small tradesmen such as grocers, milk-vendors etc. 6. Before we part with this case, we must regretfully observe, and this was not disputed by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State, that most of the cases of food adulteration which come to the Courts are cases directed against small tradesmen such as grocers, milk-vendors etc. It is common knowledge that these small tradesmen purchase the food stuff sold by them from the wholesalers and sometimes even directly from the manufacturers and more often than not the adulteration is made either by the wholesalers or by the manufacturers. Ordinarily it is not the small retailers who adulterate the articles of food sold by them. Yet it is only the small retailers who are caught by the food inspectors and the investigative machinery of the food department does not for some curious and inexplicable reason turn its attention to the wholesalers and manufacturers. The small tradesmen who eke out a precarious existence living almost from hand to mouth are sent to jail for selling food stuff which is often enough not adulterated by them and the wholesalers and manufacturers who really adulterate the food stuff and fatten themselves on the misery of others escape the arm of the law. The Food Inspection Department prides itself on its statistics by catching small tradesmen and by its gross indifference and inaction allows wholesalers and manufacturers to carry on their nefarious activities, untouched and unaffected by the penal law. The result is that a wrong impression is being created on the public mind that the law is being properly enforced, whereas in fact what is really happening is that it is only the small tradesmen who are quite often not themselves responsible for adulteration who are caught and sent to jail while there is no effective enforcement of the law against the real adulterators. This is a failing which we notice in the implementation of many of our laws. It is only the smaller flies which get caught in the web of these laws while the bigger ones escape. This syndrome of soft justice to big economic criminals and harsh justice to the humbler offenders is a systemic weakness, which affects the credibility of the rule of law itself. It is no wonder that an anonymous poet sardonically said while projecting the social dimension of this systemic deficiency. This syndrome of soft justice to big economic criminals and harsh justice to the humbler offenders is a systemic weakness, which affects the credibility of the rule of law itself. It is no wonder that an anonymous poet sardonically said while projecting the social dimension of this systemic deficiency. " ( 8 ) IT is also stated in Food Inspector, Guntur v. B. H. Rao that the prosecution has to prove service of notice and that failure to show the same, amounts to non-compliance of section 13 (2) of P. F. A. Act Therefore, the accused is entitled to acquittal as adumbrated in the above decision. Though the plea of bargain has been set up, no evidence is placed before the Court to show that the concerned magistrate has promised the accused to be lenient if the accused admitted the offence. In the absence of the same, it cannot be said that the legal evidence has been placed to prove the same. The only circumstance available before this Court is the admission made by the accused and the lenient treatment given by the Magistrate. They may indicate that there is something that transpired in between the Magistrate and the accused. But, this Court cannot presume that there was a plea of bargain in between the accused and the Court. ( 9 ) IN any view of the matter, the analyst report was not served under Section 13 (2) of the Act. I also find that the right of the accused to send it to the Central Food laboratory was affected due to non service of notice. ( 10 ) THIS is a classic case where there is blatant violation of provisions of Food adulteration Act by the Food Inspector. In the absence of service of analyst report, it cannot be proceeded with. ( 11 ) THIS appeal is in fact preferred under the provisions of New Cr. P. C. before the court about the inadequacy of sentence. The accused is entitled to acquittal on the strength of said facts. This is one such case where the procedure contemplated under Section 13 (2) p. F. A. Act, has not been followed and there is gross violation, which has lead to miscarriage of justice and rights of the accused effected. The accused is entitled to acquittal on the strength of said facts. This is one such case where the procedure contemplated under Section 13 (2) p. F. A. Act, has not been followed and there is gross violation, which has lead to miscarriage of justice and rights of the accused effected. It caused prejudice to the rights of the accused since she is deprived of her opportunity to send the sample to the central Food Laboratory. No doubt, the sentence given to the female vendor appears to be very lenient under the provisions of food Adulteration Act, but her rights have been affected due to failure to follow the procedure under Section 13 (2) of the Act and it caused prejudice. ( 12 ) ON a close scrutiny of the entire matter, i am of the considered view that the accused is entitled for acquittal rather than enhancing the punishment of sentence. I agree with the contention of the learned counsel appearing for the respondent that she is entitled to acquittal. I also find that there is no need to enhance the sentence in view of agreeing with the contention of the learned counsel appearing for the respondent. ( 13 ) TO sum up, I find that the appeal itself is not maintainable under new Cr. P. C. 1973. Old Cr. P. C. 1898 (5 of 1898) alone is applicable for those cases arising from the agency tracts of A. P. consisting of Srikakulam, vizianagaram, Visakhapatnam, East godavari, Khammam and Adilabad districts. The Registrar shall take note of this and return the appeals, if any presented under new Cr. P. C. and scrutinize them carefully by putting a specific note before the court about the applicability of new Cr. P. C. and the cases arising under old Cr. P. C. The registrar (Jud l) shall give necessary instructions to the concerned. I also find that the accused is entitled for acquittal in this case as the procedure contemplated under section 13 (2) of the Act, is not followed which led to miscarriage of justice due to the right of accused being affected for non service of analyst report. ( 14 ) HENCE, conviction and sentence imposing a fine of Rs. l,100/-, is set aside and the criminal appeal is allowed dismissed accordingly. ( 14 ) HENCE, conviction and sentence imposing a fine of Rs. l,100/-, is set aside and the criminal appeal is allowed dismissed accordingly. The accused is entitled for refund of the fine amount, if any paid after the expiry of appeal time.