IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No.1421 of 2004 Date of decision: 17th February, 2010 Vijay Kumar … Petitioner Versus State of Haryana … Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Ms. Sarpreet Ahluwalia, Advocate for Mr. Sartej S. Narula, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Hemlata Balhara, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana for the State. KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL) Vijay Kumar son of Ramesh Chand was tried in a complaint instituted by Govt. Food Inspector. The Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jagadhari came to the conclusion that petitioner had contravened section 7 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as, ‘the Act’) and thereby committed offence under Section 16(1)(a)(i) of the Act. The petitioner was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay fine of Rs.1000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months. Aggrieved against the same, petitioner filed an appeal, same was dismissed, conviction and sentence were maintained. Briefly stated, on 25th July, 1991 at about 1.10 p.m., Govt. Food Inspector Amar Nath Sharma inspected the premises of petitioner, who was owner of National Bhojnalya, Court Chowk, Jagadhari. The Criminal Revision No.1421 of 2004 petitioner was found in possession of 3 kg of cooked Rajma contained in a Patila for public sale. The Govt. Food Inspector, after giving notice, purchased 1 kg 500 gms of cooked Rajma for the purposes of sample and paid Rs.15/-. The whole contents of the Rajma were mixed and same were made homogeneous. Same was divided into three equal parts and put in three empty, clean and dry bottles. Sample was sent to the Public Analyst, who vide his report Ex.PD opined that the sample contained prohibited Red Oil Soluble Coaltar Dye. Thus, the sample was found adulterated. Charges were framed against the petitioner. Kishan Lal from the office of Local Health Authority was examined as PW-1. Dev Raj PW-2 was also from the office of Local Health Authority. He had taken the sample to the Public Analyst, Chandigarh. Dr.R.K. Jain PW-3, DTO Kurukshetra was present when the sample was taken into possession. Govt. Food Inspector Amar Nath Sharma appeared as PW-4. Thereafter, prosecution closed its evidence. Statement of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. was recorded and all incriminating circumstances were put to him. He denied the same and pleaded innocence. No witness was examined in defence. Ms. Sarpreet Ahluwalia, Advocate appearing for the petitioner, has very fairly contended that two courts below have placed implicit reliance upon the testimony of PW-3 Dr.R.K. Jain, DTO and PW-4 Govt. Food Inspector Amar Nath Sharma, therefore, she will not be able to dislodge their testimony. Counsel has further stated that she will not be in a position to assail the conviction of the petitioner. However, counsel has submitted that in the present case sample was drawn on 25th July, 1991 and petitioner has already suffered mental pain and agony of protracted trial for about 19 years. Petitioner is also stated to have undergone few days of his actual sentence. 2 Criminal Revision No.1421 of 2004 Taking into consideration the protracted trial, this Court is inclined to reduce the sentence awarded upon the petitioner. This Court has dealt with the entire case law and noticed the consistent view taken by this Court in ‘Lajpat Rai v. State of Haryana’ 2010(1) RCR Criminal 311. Therefore, in view of the ratio of law noticed in Lajpat Rai’s case (supra) and submissions made by counsel for the petitioner, this Court is of the view that ends of justice will be fully met in case sentence awarded upon the petitioner is reduced to already undergone. However, sentence of fine is enhanced to Rs.10,000/-. The fine shall be deposited in the trial Court within three months from today, failing which the petitioner shall undergo the sentence awarded by the trial Court. With the modifications in sentence, noticed above, present revision petition is disposed of. [KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA] JUDGE February 17, 2010 rps 3