Criminal Revision No. 761 of 2003 (O&M) 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Criminal Revision No. 761 of 2003 (O&M) Date of decision: 7.4.2010 Anil Kumar ......Petitioner Versus State of Haryana .......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr.Bipin Ghai, Sr. Advocate with Mr.Sandeep Gehlawat, for the petitioner. Mr.H.S.Beniwal, DAG, Haryana. **** SABINA, J. Anil Kumar-petitioner was convicted for an offence under Section 7 read with Section 16 (1) (a) (i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 vide judgment dated 4.4.2007 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kurukshetra. Vide order dated 5.4.2007 he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and a fine of Rs.1,000/-. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed an appeal, which was dismissed by the Additional Criminal Revision No. 761 of 2003 (O&M) 2 Sessions Judge, Kurukshetra vide judgment dated 2.4.2003. Hence, the present revision petition. Prosecution case, as noticed by the Appellate Court in para Nos. 2 to 6 of its judgment, is reproduced herein below:- “2. The broad facts leading to the Prosecution, conviction and sentence of the appellant-accused are : Shri Harbhajan Singh, Government Food Inspector, appointed vide Haryana Government Notification No.36/36/84-4HB11 dated 20.3.1985 (hereinafter to be referred to G.F.I.) along with Dr. T.R. Girdhar, District Health Officer, Kurukshetra, inspected the premises of accused Anil Kumar at Subhash Mandi, Kurukshetra, at about 2.30 p.m. on 12.2.1993. Anil Kumar was found in possession of about 50 kilograms of Toria oil contained in a big drum (container) for public sale. Harbhajan Singh G.F.I. disclosed his identity, served a notice in writing and purchased 450 grams of Toria oil after mixing the whole contents properly and making uniform against payment of Rs.10/- and a receipt. The Toria oil purchased was divided into three equal parts, bottled in three dry, clean, and empty bottles, stopped tightly, sealed and labeled according to the rules. One of the sealed bottles along with memorandum in form VII was dispatched to the Public Analyst, Haryana, Chandigarh, for analysis in a Criminal Revision No. 761 of 2003 (O&M) 3 sealed bottles of sample with two copies for memorandum in form VII were deposited with the Local Health Authority, Kurukshetra, on 12.2.1993. A copy of memorandum in form VII were deposited with the Local Health Authority, Kurukshetra, on 12.2.1993. A copy of memorandum in form VII and the specimen signature of the seal used to seal the samples and packets were sent to Public Analyst, Haryana, Chandigarh, separately, vide a registered post bearing receipt No.2524 dated 12.2.1993. The Public Analyst, Haryana, Chandigarh, analysed the sample and found that the sample gave Bellier's Turbidity Temperature 20.0ºC against the minimum prescribed standard of 23.0ºC, in contravention of Rule 50 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955. Shri Harbhajan Singh G.F.I. Lodged a complaint for prosecution of the accused with the Courts at Kurukshetra and sent copy of the report of Public analyst along with a forwarding letter to the accused through registered post and intimated Local Health Authorities. 3. Shri Balbir Singh, the then learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kurukshetra, found sufficient grounds to summon the accused on the basis of allegations contained in the complaint and issued process against the accused vide order dated 24.3.1993. Criminal Revision No. 761 of 2003 (O&M) 4 4. Anil Kumar accused appeared and moved an application under Section 13(2) of the P.F.A. Act on 9.4.1993. Anil Kumar accused however withdrew the application under Section 13(2) of the P.F.A. Act on 20.10.1993. 5. Shri Manjit Singh, the then learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kurukshetra, ordered the case to be tried as warrant case and fixed the case for pre-charge evidence of complainant, vide order dated 3.11.1993. 6. After conclusion of pre-charge evidence, Anil Kumar accused was charge-sheeted for commission of offence under Section 7 punishable under Section 16(1) (a)(i) of the P.F.A. Act, by the then learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kurukshetra, vide order dated 5.7.1995. The accused pleaded not guilty to charge and claimed trial.” Learned senior counsel for the petitioner, during the course of arguments, has not challenged the conviction part of the judgment and has prayed that the sentence qua imprisonment be reduced to already undergone by the petitioner. In support of his arguments learned senior counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on Risala v. State of Haryana, (O&H) 2008(2) RCR (Criminal) 239, wherein it was held that since the petitioner had suffered protracted trial of 24 years, it would be appropriate to reduce the sentence as already undergone. However, the sentence of fine Criminal Revision No. 761 of 2003 (O&M) 5 was enhanced to Rs.10,000/-. There is nothing on record to suggest that the petitioner was a previous convict. The sample of Toria oil was drawn on 12.2.1993. Since then the petitioner is facing the criminal proceedings. Accordingly, the conviction of the petitioner is maintained. However, the sentence qua imprisonment is reduced to already undergone by him and sentence of fine is enhanced to Rs.10,000/- to be deposited by the petitioner within a period of one month. Non deposit of fine shall render this revision petition as dismissed. With this modification, the present revision petition is disposed of. (SABINA) JUDGE April 07, 2010 anita