(1) SPECIAL leave granted.

(2) THE appellant was convicted under S. 16(1) (a) (i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. The facts are not in dispute. The respondent has been sentenced to 6 months rigorous imprisonment and to pay a line of Rs. 1,000.00 . Notice was issued confined to the question of sentence. The learned counsel argues that this is a fit case where the appellant should be admitted to probation. On the other hand, Mr Mahajan for the respondent points out the provision in Section 20-AA in support of his submission that the Special Act excludes application of the Probation of Offenders Act. We are inclined to agree with him that the special provision made in the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act overrides the provision of the Probation of Offenders Act and therefore the appellant will not be entitled to the benefit thereof. Counsel tor the appellant thereafter argued that the minimum sentence, though 6 months, could be reduced to 3 months in specific cases for good reasons.

(3) WE are satisfied that this is a case where this court should reduce the sentence. The appeal is partly allowed and the sentence of imprisonment is reduced to three