AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
2 paragraphs · 213 wordsK.P.S. Sandhu, J. (Oral)
This petitioner was convicted and sentenced to one year''s rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 300/ or, on default, three months, rigorous imprisonment under section 27 (a) (ii) and to one year''s rigorous imprisonment under section 28 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act. In the appeal the conviction and sentence were maintained by the Additional Sessions Judge, Ferozepur. The petitioner has come up in revision to this Court. Notice regarding sentence only was given to the State. The petitioner is a young man of 26 years of age, is not a previous convict and the alleged recovery was of 38 tablets only which were not sent to the Public Analyst for examination. Mr Ghai, learned counsel for the petitioner, further states that the petitioner is no more in this business and prays that the proviso to section 27 (a) (ii) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act be pressed into service. I find considerable force in the submissions made by the learned counsel. Consequently I reduce the sentence of the petitioner to the one already undergone by him under both the counts but enhance the fine from Rs. 300 to Rs. 1000 or in default, rigorous imprisonment for six months. With this modification this petition stands disposed of.