- (1.) B. K. Rathi, J. The Food Inspector on 4-11-76 at about 12. 00 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 accord ingly prosecuted for the offence under Sec tion 7/16, P. RA. 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 7-2-85. Against that order, the revisionist preferred Criminal Appeal No. 26 of 1985, which has been decided on 1-8-86 by the VI 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.
(2.) 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 con tended that the sentence may be permitted to be commuted under clause (c) of Sec tion 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 v. Food Inspector, (1997) 9 SCC page 101": "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 approapriate case for commutation of sentence where almost a decade has gone by. We, there fore, direct the appellant to deposit in the trial Court a sum of Rs. 6,000/- as fine in commuta tion of the sentence of six months' simple im prisonment within a period of six weeks from today and intimate to the appropriate Govern ment that such fine has been deposited. On deposit of such fine, the State Government may formalise the matter by passing appropriate or ders 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 ac cordingly 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 his sentence of six months' R. I. along with the copy of this judgment and receipt of Rs. 6,000/- deposited by him. On that ap plication of the applicant, the State Government may formalise the matter by passing appropriate order under Section 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.
(3.) THE revision is disposed of with the modification of the sentence as aforesaid while maintaining the conviction. Revision disposed of. .;