Crl. Rev. No.1029 of 2004 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Criminal Revision No.1029 of 2004 Date of Decision: 15 - 2 - 2010 Raj Kumar .....Petitioner v. State of Haryana .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA *** Present: Mr.Arjun Lakhanpal, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms.Hemlata Balhara, AAG, Haryana. *** KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL) Petitioner is stated to be a milk vendor. On 26.9.1991 Chand Ram, Government Food Inspector along with Dr.P.L.Verma, Medical Officer, General Hospital, Hisar intercepted the petitioner and he was found in possession of 20 Kgs. un-indicated milk for public sale. Government Food Inspector Chand Ram PW1 served notice Ex.PA upon the accused and purchased 750 Mls. of milk and made payment of Rs.4/-. The milk so purchased was put in three dry, clean and empty bottles. The sample was taken in consonance with the Rules and provisions of Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. The sample was sent to the Public Analyst, who submitted his report Ex.PF and found that sample was adulterated as it contained milk Crl. Rev. No.1029 of 2004 [2] fat 23% deficit. So far as milk solids not fat, it was 30% deficit of the minimum prescribed standard. Thus, the sample was not in consonance with the standard prescribed and was held to be adulterated. Petitioner was charged for offence under Section 16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (for short, `the Act'). Petitioner pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. Chand Ram, Government Food Inspector appeared as PW1 and Dr.P.L.Verma as PW2. The trial Court came to the conclusion that testimonies of these two witnesses are reliable and held the petitioner guilty under Section 16(1)(a)(i) of the Act and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-. In default of payment of fine to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for three months. Aggrieved against the same, petitioner had filed an appeal. The Appellate Court maintained the conviction and upheld the sentence. Petitioner in the present case was was taken into custody on 13.4.2004. He was ordered to be released on bail on 29.5.2004. Thus, the petitioner has undergone 1 month and 22 days of his actual sentence. An affidavit to this effect sworn by Satyawan, Acting Superintendent, Central Jail, Hisar has been placed on record by Ms.Hemlata Balhara, counsel for the State. Counsel for the petitioner has relied upon a judgment of this Court in Lajpat Rai v. State of Haryana, 2010(1) RCR (Criminal) 310 wherein this Court relying upon the consistent view taken by various Single Benches of this Court had reduced the sentence to already undergone on the ground that accused had suffered mental pain and agony of protracted trial. Protracted trial was considered as one of the mitigating circumstance. Crl. Rev. No.1029 of 2004 [3] In the present case the sample was drawn on 26.9.1991. Period of more than 18 years is going to elapse. In these circumstances, the ends of justice will be fully met in case the sentence is suitably reduced. Accordingly, the sentence is reduced to the period already undergone. However, the sentence of fine is enhanced to Rs.10,000/-. The fine shall be deposited within three months. In case the fine is not deposited, no benefit in reduction in sentence shall accrue to the petitioner. ( KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA ) February 15, 2010. JUDGE RC