Kamal Singh vs State of U.P.

B.K. Rathi, J.—The Food Inspector on 4.11.1976, at about 12 noon found the applicant exposing sweets for sale at his shop situated in mohalla Naurangabad, P.S. Civil Lines, Aligarh. The sample of yellow barfi was taken, which was alleged by the applicant to be a vegetable oil preparation. It was duly sent to the public analyst and on analysis it was found to be adulterated and containing Aramin, which is a coaltar dye. The applicant was accordingly prosecuted for the offence u/s 7/16, P.F.A. Act and was convicted and sentenced to one year R.I. and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000 by the Magistrate by an order dated 7.2.1985. Against the order, the revisionist preferred Criminal Appeal No. 26 of 1985, which has been decided on 1.8.1986, by the v. Ith Additional Sessions Judge, Aligarh. He has maintained the conviction, but has reduced the sentence to six months R.I. and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000 and in default of payment of fine to undergo three months R.I. Aggrieved by that order, the present revision has been preferred.

I have heard Sri Akhilesh Srivastava learned Counsel for the revisionist and the A.G.A.

The revision has been argued only on the question of sentence. It is contended that the sentence may be permitted to be commuted under Clause (c) of Section 433, Cr. P.C. as the sample in the present case was taken in the year 1976. The learned Counsel has referred to the following observations of the Hon''ble Supreme Court in the case of N. Sukumaran Nair Vs. Food Inspector, Mavelikara, .

The offence took place in the year 1984. The Appellant has been awarded six months'' simple imprisonment and has also been ordered to pay a fine of Rs. 1000. Under Clause (d) of Section 433 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, "the appropriate Government is empowered to commute the sentence of simple imprisonment for fine. We think that this would be an appropriate case for commutation of sentence where almost a decade has gone by. We, therefore, direct the Appellant to deposit in the trial court a sum of Rs. 6,000 as fine in commutation of the sentence of six months'' simple imprisonment within a period of six weeks from today and intimate to the appropriate Government that such fine has been deposited. On deposit of such fine, the State Government may formalise the matter by passing appropriate orders under Clause (d) of Section 433 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

In view of the above observations, there is no reason as to why the sentence be not commuted in the present case. I accordingly direct that the applicant shall deposit a sum of Rs. 6,000 as fine in commutation of his sentence of six months'' R.I. (in addition of the fine of Rs. 1,000 imposed on him). On deposit of fine, the applicant shall not be arrested. The applicant shall send an application to the State Government for commutation of h is sentence of six month''s R.I. along with the copy of this judgment and receipt of Rs. 6,000 deposited by him. On that application of the applicant, the State Government may formalise the matter by passing appropriate order u/s 433(c), Cr. P.C. However, in case the revisionist fails to deposit the amount of fine, as directed above, he shall serve out the sentence imposed upon him by the Magistrate.

The revision is disposed of with the modification of the sentence as aforesaid while maintaining the conviction.