Ramji Chouhan vs State of Madhya Pradesh (Now The State of Chhattisgarh)

T.P. Sharma, J.—By this revision, the applicant has challenged legality and propriety of the judgment dated 2-3-2000 passed by the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Rajnandgaon, in Criminal Appeal No. 45/96, affirming the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 12-3-96 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dongargarh in Criminal Complaint Case No. 279/92, whereby the trial Court has convicted the applicant u/s 7 read with section 16(1-A)(ii) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (for short ''the Act'') and sentenced him to undergo RI for six months and pay fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for two months for adulteration of bundi laddu i.e. food. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the judgments and records of the trial Court.

Record of the trial Court, evidence of R. S. Diwaker (PW-1), the Food Inspector, and statement of the applicant u/s 313 of the Cr.P.C. are sufficient for proving the fact that the applicant was in possession of bundi laddu, he has sold the bundi laddu to the Food Inspector which has been analyzed by the Public Analyst and same was found adulterated. Therefore, I do not find any illegality in the concurrent finding of facts of both the Courts below and convicting the applicant u/s 16(1-A)(ii) of the Act.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is a shop keeper and as per case of the prosecution he has sold bundi laddu which has been found adulterated. He is facing criminal prosecution since 1992 for about last 20 years. At present, age of the applicant is more than 55 years. Learned counsel further submits that no purpose would be served by sending the applicant in custody and ends of justice would be met by enhancing the amount of fine. Therefore, as held by the Supreme Court in the matter of Satya Narayan Agarwal Vs. State of Assam, the applicant be allowed to file appropriate application before the appropriate Government for commutation of sentence. Considering the circumstances of the case, claim of the applicant, period of pendency of prosecution and nature of food, the revision is partly allowed. Conviction of the applicant is hereby maintained. However, sentence imposed upon him is modified. He is hereby sentenced to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/-, in default additional RI for two months, with a condition that if the applicant files application before the Court below that he will file appropriate application before the appropriate Government under clause (d) of section 433 of the Cr.P.C. for commutation of sentence within thirty days and files such application within sixty days from today, and furnishes personal bond of Rs. 10,000/- with a solvent surety of like amount, then he be released till the order of the appropriate Government. In case of non-compliance of this order or rejection of the application by the appropriate Government, the applicant shall surrender himself and suffer the sentence imposed upon him by the trial Court.