Supreme Court of India
Birbal vs State Of Haryana on 7 January, 2002
Equivalent citations: JT2002(1)SC289, AIRONLINE 2002 SC 120, (2002) 1 EFR 550, 2002 FAJ 157, (2002) 1 BLJ 812, (2002) 2 CRIMES 72, (2002) 44 ALL CRI C 466, (2002) 22 OCR 647, (2002) 1 ALL CRI LR 644, (2002) 1 CUR CRI R 154, (2002) 1 ALL CRI R 784, (2002) 1 FAC 165, (2002) 1 JT 289, (2002) 2 SUPREME 110, (2002) 96 DLT 59, (2002) MAD LJ(CRI) 505, (2002) 2 RECCRIR 543, (2002) 2 SUPREME 249, (2002) 44 ALLCRIC 469, (2002) 2 EASTCRIC 40, (2002) 61 DRJ 670, (2002) 22 OCR 648, (2002) 3 RAJ LW 361, 2009 (13) SCC 769, (2002) 1 CHANDCRIC 215, (2002) 1 ALLCRILR 650, (2002) 1 ANDHLT(CRI) 382, 2010 (1) SCC (CRI) 1199, (2002) SC CR R 261, (2002) SC CR R 255, (2002) 1 JT 289 (SC), (2002) 1 JT 291 (SC)
Bench: K.T. Thomas, S.N. Phukan
ORDER
1. Leave granted.
2. Appellant stands convicted under Section 16(1)(a)(i) read with Section 7 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- The conviction and sentence were confined in appeal and the High Court did not interfere in revision.
3. The only point canvassed before us is that the sentence of imprisonment may be reduced to three months as permitted under the second proviso to Section 16(1) of the Act.
4. It is an admitted fact that the food article involved in the case falls within the purview of the said proviso (it is milk and hence it is a primary food). An affidavit has been filed by the appellant showing the reasons for making a plea that the sentence of imprisonment may be reduced to three months.
5. On a perusal of the facts detailed in the affidavit, we persuade ourselves to hold that they are adequate and sufficient for reducing the sentence to the aforesaid minimum period of imprisonment of three months.
6. In the result, we allow this appeal to the limited extent by reducing the sentence of imprisonment to three months. If the appellant has completed the said period, we direct the jail authorities to release him if he had remitted the fine amount.
7. This appeal is disposed of accordingly.