In a criminal revision, the High Court refused to interfere with the conviction for food adulteration but, considering the 27-year trial delay and petitioner's first-time offense, reduced the sentence to time already served and waived the fine.
Sentence modified to period already undergone; fine waived; petitioner discharged on bail.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
[2024:RJ-JD:279]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 978/2003
Pooran Mal S/o Shankar Lal, B/c Brahmin Diama, R/o Village Gonerda P.O. Pundlota, District Nagaur (At present lodged in Sub-Jail, Nagaur)
----Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kapil Bissa For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mukesh Trivedi, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Judgment
03/01/2024
[2024:RJ-JD:279]
[CRLR-978/2003]
(2 of 5)
milk which was being carried by the petitioner on his motorcycle. Upon a suspicion, he purchased 750 ML milk on payment of Rs.7.50 to the petitioner. Thereafter, at the same time, a notice on form No.6 was given to the petitioner regarding sample collection of milk. After following due procedure, the samples were tested and the same were found to be adulterated. Upon which, a complaint was presented against the petitioner.
[2024:RJ-JD:279]
[CRLR-978/2003]
(3 of 5)
pertains to the year 1996. The petitioner was 23 years of age at that time. He was not having any criminal antecedents and it was the first criminal case registered against him. No adverse remark has been passed over his conduct except the impugned judgment. The petitioner has already suffered agony of protracted trial of 27 years. The petitioner has remained in custody for a period of ten days out of total sentence of six months R.I. With these submissions, learned counsel prays that by taking a lenient view, the sentence awarded to the petitioner may be reduced to the period already undergone.
[2024:RJ-JD:279]
[CRLR-978/2003]
(4 of 5)
this court for last 20 years. The right to speedy and expeditious trial is one of the most valuable and cherished rights guaranteed under the Constitution. The petitioner has already suffered the agony of protracted trial, spanning over a period of more than 27 years and has been in the corridors of the court for this prolonged period. It was the first criminal case registered against him. He has not been shown to be indulged in any other criminal case except this one. He remained incarcerated for a period of ten days out of total sentence of six months R.I. In view of the facts noted above, the case of the petitioner deserves to be dealt with leniency. The petitioner also deserves the benefit of the consistent view taken by this court in this regard. Thus, guided by the judicial pronouncements made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of Haripada Das Vs. State of West Bangal , reported in (1998) 9 SCC 678 and Alister Anthony Pareira vs. State of Maharashtra reported in 2012 2 SCC 648 and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, age of petitioner, his criminal antecedents, his status in the society and the fact that he faced financial hardship and had to go through mental agony, this court is of the view that ends of justice would be met, if sentence imposed upon the petitioner is reduced to the period already undergone by him.
(5 of 5)
[2024:RJ-JD:279]
[CRLR-978/2003]
sentence awarded to the petitioner for the offence under Section 7/16(1) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, is modified to the extent that the sentence he has undergone till date would be sufficient and justifiable to serve the interest of justice. The fine imposed by the trial court is also waived. The petitioner is on bail. He need not surrender. His bail bonds are discharged.
(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J
27-MS/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the sentence awarded to the petitioner for food adulteration should be reduced given the protracted trial duration and his first-time offense status.
Whether the fine imposed by the trial court should be waived.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Haripada Das Vs. State of West BangalRelied on¶27
Haripada Das Vs. State of West Bangal (1998) 9 SCC 678 · Who else cites this
Alister Anthony Pareira vs. State of MaharashtraRelied on¶27
Alister Anthony Pareira vs. State of Maharashtra 2012 2 SCC 648 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Pooran Mal
State of Rajasthan
Manoj Kumar Garg
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
Manoj Kumar Garg
Parties & counsel
