Present: Mr for Mr 1. The 22.02.2012 pass judgment of con learned Judicial under Section 1 referred to as ‘T !"# 16 of the Act 2. Bri working as Me appointed as F government no under Section 9 authorized to la *+ Mr. B.S. Mamli, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Nitesh Sharma, DAG, Punjab. ,,,, -') The present revision is preferred assed by learned Additional Sessio conviction and order of sentence d ial Magistrate Ist Class, Mansa, h n 16 of Prevention of Food Adul ‘The Act’). The petitioner was sen # $%&'() RI for 01 year with of which, to underg Brief facts of the case of prosecutio Medical Officer at Mini PHC, K Food Inspector for the entire notification No.520492НВ П976/1 n 9 of the Prevention of Food A launch criminal proceedings there ./.0/ 1$&" %(%&200/0 red against the judgment dated ssions Judge, Mansa, whereby the e dated 07.05.2010 passed by the , have been upheld in a case filed dulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter sentenced as mentioned below: $ ith a fine of Rs.3,000/9 in default ergo RI for 03 months. tion are that Doctor Nirmal Singh , Karandi PHC, Sardulgarh was e area of State of Punjab vide 6/14111 dated 30th April 1976 Adulteration Act and was also ereof DHS vide letter No. E97(1) ed he he ed ter ult gh as de 76 so 1) MANISHA 2025.02.03 17:40 I attest to the accuracy and authenticiy of this order/judgment ./.0/ Pb., 2004/2848 presence of Do intercepted one Karandi Bus St number plate an and buffaloes in by him. He (com petitioner, dema prescribed unde also signed by Sardulgarh, Dis to Local Health human consump 3. Lea have not apprec weightage to the was joined or provisions of th send any intima him choice to g submits that the who took the sa is unexplained d 4. learned counsel convicted by th / 8 dated 29.6.2004. On 15.12.2005 Doctor Rupinder Kumar, SMO I ne Raj Kumar (petitioner herein) Stand. The person was on Rajdo and was in possession of about 16 in four drums kept for sale for hu complainant) after disclosing his id manded a sample of milk by giving der the Prevention of Food Adult by the petitioner and witnessed istrict Mansa and he himself. Wh lth Authority, Mansa it was declar mption in the report. Hence, the co Learned counsel for the petitioner reciated the evidence properly and the evidence of the prosecution. F or examined by the prosecution the Act were also not followed by mation to the petitioner regarding o get the sample analysist second the link evidence is missing as the sample to the Chemical Examiner d delay in filing the complaint. , learned State counsel sel for the petitioner and submit the learned trial Court based on c 05 at about 10900 a.m., he, in the Incharge Khiala Kalan, Mansa in) son of Sh. Diwan Chand at doot Motor cycle having without 160 liters of mixed milk of cows human consumption as confessed s identity as Food Inspector to the ing him a notice vide form No.VI ulteration Rules, 1954, same was d by Sat Pal Pharmacist, PHC, hen the sample of milk was sent clared as adulterated and unfit for complaint. er contends that the Courts below nd the trial Court has given undue Further, no independent witness on. He submits that mandatory by the complainant as he failed to ing the analysis report for giving nd time. Learned counsel further there is no affidavit of the person, er Laboratory. Furthermore, there sel opposes the prayer made by mits that the petitioner has been n correct appreciation of the facts he sa at ut s ed he VI as C, nt or w ue ss ry to ng er n, re by en ts MANISHA 2025.02.03 17:40 I attest to the accuracy and authenticiy of this order/judgment ./.0/ and the law. M Appellate Court 5. Hav the record with has been adequ any interference the last almost learned State co and 15 days, ou view of his clea case for grant of 1958 empower t in the cases and Hon’ble Suprem as under:9 A t Kishan Kaul, ha / 2 Moreover, the conviction has bee urt, as such interference by this Co Having heard the learned counsel f ith their able assistance, it appears quately proved and the judgment ce. However, the petitioner has be st 18 years. According to the custo counsel, the petitioner has under out of the sentence of one year im lean antecedents, this Court finds t of probation. Sections 3 and 4 of er the courts to release the offender and circumstances mentioned there reme Court in speaking through Ju A two Judge Bench of the Hon’b s has held as under:9 # $ % & been upheld by the learned lower Court is not warranted. l for the parties and after perusing ars that the guilt of the petitioner nt of conviction does not warrant been facing the agony of trial for ustody certificate produced by the dergone total period of 01 month imposed upon him. Therefore, in nds the matter at hand to be a fit of the Probation of Offenders Act, ders on probation of good conduct erein. A two Judge Bench of the !" Justice Bela M. Trivedi, has held n’ble Supreme Court in #$% speaking through Justice Sanjay ! " ' er ng er nt or he th in fit ct, ct he " ld % ay MANISHA 2025.02.03 17:40 I attest to the accuracy and authenticiy of this order/judgment ./.0/ 6. Acc Additional Ses discussion abov furnishing a per petitioner is also behaviour for a court within a supervision of th further directed commit breach undergo the sen 7. Wi 1!1#320-0 (i) (ii) / 4 ! Accordingly, the judgment dated essions Judge, Mansa is uphel ove, the petitioner is directed to ersonal bond of Rs.20,000/9 with lso directed to furnish an undertak r a period of one year, to the sati a period of two weeks. The pet f the concerned Probation Officer d ed that if the petitioner fails to com ch of the undertaking given by h entence imposed upon him, as men With the aforesaid directions, the p 0 Whether speaking/reasoned ii) Whether reportable ! ed 22.02.2012 passed by learned eld. However, in view of the to be released on probation on th a surety of the like amount. The taking to keep the peace and good satisfaction of the concerned trial petitioner shall remain under the er during the aforesaid period. It is comply with the said directions or him, he shall be called upon to entioned above. e present petition is disposed of. ' ) Yes/No Yes/No ed he on he od ial he is or to MANISHA 2025.02.03 17:40 I attest to the accuracy and authenticiy of this order/judgment