IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No. 670 of 2005 Date of decision: December 03, 2010 Subhash @ Gopi .. Petitioner Vs. State of Haryana .. Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.N. Jindal Present: Mr. S.S. Godara, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. J.S. Rattu, DAG, Haryana for the respondent. A.N. Jindal, J Assailed in this petition is the judgment dated 19.2.2005 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fatehabad, dismissing the appeal filed by the accused- petitioner (herein referred as, 'the petitioner') against the judgment dated 14.2.2003 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Fatehabad, convicting and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of Rs.1000/- under Section 16 (1) (a)(i) read with Section 7 (i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (for brevity, 'the Act'). At the very outset without assailing the finding of conviction, it has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner being first offender and having already undergone three months and nine days of the substantive sentence, may be dealt with leniently on the quantum of sentence. Having examined the impugned judgment, the evidence appears to have been appreciated in the right perspective. Both the courts below have returned concurrent findings of fact that the accused was guilty of the offence for which he was charged. No illegality much less irregularity or perversity has been pointed out warranting interference by this court. As such, no exception to the opinion expressed by the courts below could be made at this revisional stage. Now coming to the quantum of sentence, it may be observed that the occurrence took place way back in the year 1994; the petitioner has already suffered a lot due to the protracted proceedings pending against him Criminal Revision No. 670 of 2005 -2- since then; he has already undergone three months and nine days of the substantive sentence. As such, I am of the considered opinion that ends of justice would be met if some leniency is extended to him. Resultantly, this revision petition is dismissed with the modification in the sentence which is reduced to that of already undergone by him. However, the fine is enhanced to Rs.20,000/- which would be paid within three months from to-day. Copy of this judgment be sent to the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Fatehabad for compliance. December 03, 2010 (A.N. Jindal) deepak Judge