- (1.) P. K. Jain, J. Heard Sri A. P. Misra, brief holder of Sri A. D. Giri, learned coun sel for the revisionist and learned AGA.
(2.) REVISIONIST Ghanshyam Prasad was convicted under Section 7/16 of the Preven tion of Food Adulteration Act and was sen tenced imprisonment for six months and fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo further imprisonment for three months. Criminal Appeal No. 180 of 1982 filed by him was dismissed by IV Addl. Sessions Judge, Varanasi, vide judgment and order dated 31-1-83. Present revision is pressed on the question of quantum of sentence. It is con tended that the offence was allegedly com mitted in the year 1980 and it is now about 17 years since the offence was committed. No useful purpose shall be served by send ing the revisionist to jail after lapse of 17 years. The revisionist has already suffered imprisonment for about two weeks after the dismissal of the appeal. Learned AGA says that minimum sentence is provided under Section 16 which cannot be reduced. Section 16 provides minimum sen tence of six months and a fine not less than one thousand. Proviso (i) to sub-section (l) of section 16 provides that the Court may, for any adequate and special reasons to be mentioned in the judgment, impose a sen tence, of imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than three months if the offence is under sub-clause (1) of clause (a) and is with respect to an article of food being primary food, which is adulterated due to human agency or is with respect to an article of food which is misbranded within the meaning of sub- clause (k) of clause (ix) of section 2.
(3.) THE revisionist's case is covered by sub-clause (1) of clause (a) and is in respect of an article of food being primary food. In view of the proviso mentioned above the sentence of imprisonment can, at the best, be reduced to three months in case there exist adequate and special reasons. Except the fact that offence was committed in the year 1980 which is not adequate reason there is no special and adequate reason for reducing the minimum sentence awarded by the courts below. There is no merit in this revision. It is hereby dismissed. Stay order dated 14-2-82 is vacated. Revision dismissed .;