Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 899 (RAJ)

Kamlesh v. State of Rajasthan

2016-06-23

SANGEET LODHA

body2016
JUDGMENT Sangeet Lodha, J. This revision petition is directed against the judgment and order dated 13.12.2002 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, (Fast Track Court), Jalore in Criminal Appeal No. 169/2002, affirming the judgment and order dated 7.2.2002 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalore in Criminal Case No. 244/2000, convicting the accused-petitioner for offence under Section 7/16(l)(a) of Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (for short the 'Act of 1954') and sentencing him to undergo 1 year simple imprisonment and fine of Rs.2,000/-; in default of payment of fine, to further undergo 1 month's simple imprisonment. 2. At the outset, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that, the appellant does not want to press the revision petitioner against the order of the Appellate Court affirming the conviction of the accused-petitioner by the Trial Court for offence under Section 7/16(l)(a) of the Act of 1954. However, it is submitted that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Trial Court should have extended the accused-petitioner the benefits under the provisions of Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958. Learned Counsel submitted that, at the time of registration of the case, the accused-petitioner was only 20 years of age. It is submitted that the offence took place about 16 years ago. It is submitted that the sample of the food article (Mawa) was not found to be adulterated rather, the sample of the Mawa taken was found to be deficient by about 15% of the milk fat. Learned Counsel submitted that, this is a fit case wherein the benefit of probation under Section 4 of the Act of 1958, should be extended to the accused-petitioner. In support of the contention, learned Counsel has relied upon a decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Jagdish Prasad v. State of Delhi & Anr., 1982 Cr.L.R. (SC) 571. 3. On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor submitted that, taking into consideration the gravity of the offence committed, the punishment awarded by the Trial Court affirmed by the Appellate Court is just and proper and does not warrant any interference by this Court in exercise of it revisional jurisdiction. 4. I have considered the submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the Public Prosecutor and also perused the material on record. 5. 4. I have considered the submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the Public Prosecutor and also perused the material on record. 5. It is to be noticed that the complaint against the petitioner on the basis of the inspection made on 14.8.2000 was submitted by the Food Inspector before the Court of competent jurisdiction under Section 7/16(1) the Act of 1954 on 16.11.2000. Indisputably, more than 15 years have lapsed since the commission of the offence. It is not in dispute that the sample of the Mawa taken by the Food Inspector, which was sent for examination to the Public Health Laboratory, Jodhpur, was found to be deficient in respect of milk fact about 15%, but then, a bare perusal of report (Ex.P-9) makes it abundantly clear that the test for Starch, Sucrose, Urea, Sodium Carbonate and added colouring matter was found to be negative. It is also relevant to notice that at the time of the occurrence of the incident, the accused was only 20 years of age. Thus, taking into consideration the nature of accusation and the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case notice as above, this Court considers it appropriate to extend the benefit of probation to the accused-petitioner under Section 4(1) of the Act of 1958. 6. Accordingly, the accused-petitioner Kamlesh is directed to execute a bond Rs.20,000/- for the period of 1 year to the satisfaction of the Trial Court to appear and receive sentence as and when called upon during such period. In the meantime, he shall not indulge in commission of any criminal offence. 7. The revision petition stands disposed of accordingly.