Criminal Revision No. 30 of 1994 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh. Criminal Revision No. 30 of 1994 Date of Decision: 21.01.2008. Satish Kumar …Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and Another …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Mr. Roopak Bansal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Manmohan Sikka, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana, for the State. Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. (Oral) The petitioner was convicted and sentenced by the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sonepat, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and a fine of Rs.1000/-. In default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months. His appeal was dismissed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sonepat. Aggrieved against the same, the petitioner has filed the present revision petition. Briefly stated that on 17.5.1984 at about 1.00 P.M. Food Inspector S.K.Sharma accompanied by Dr. Baldev Data, inspected the premises of accused/petitioner and found him in possession of 800 cakes of Ice Candy weighing 50 grams each contained in an ice box for public sale. After issuance of notice, Food Inspector purchased 900 Criminal Revision No. 30 of 1994 2 grams of Ice Candy of orange colour against payment of Rs.3.60 ps. The samples, so sent, could not meet the prescribed standards and hence, after the trial the petitioner was convicted. Mr. Roopak Bansal, Advocate, appearing for the petitioner at the outset has stated that he will not address the arguments on merits, as he has gone through the evidence. He has further stated that he is conscious of the fact that in a revision scope is limited. He has confined his arguments that since the occurrence pertains to 17.5.1984, a period of 23 years have lapsed and the petitioner should be dealt leniently. He has further stated that in these 23 years, the petitioner has not committed any other offence. Since the minimum sentence is prescribed, his request for releasing the petitioner to sentence already undergone by him cannot be accepted. However, I am in agreement with Mr. Bansal that the 23 years have lapsed and the petitioner has suffered protracted trial. Therefore, I order that the appellant be released on probation under the Probation of Offenders Act, 1985 for a period of six months to maintain peace and good behaviour and sureties to this effect shall be furnished by him in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sonepat on or before 25.3.2008, to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sonepat. However, costs of litigation is assessed as Rs.5,000/-. With these modifications, the present revision petition is disposed of. (Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Judge January 21, 2008 “DK”