SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1990 Supreme(Guj) 34

V.H.BHAIRAVIA
RAMANBHAI SHIVABHAI PRAJAPATI – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: K.M.SHAH, M.C.SHAH, S.P.DAVE

V. H. BHAIRAVIA, J.

( 1 ) THIS Criminal Revision Application has been directed by the petitioner-accused against the judgment and order of the learned Addl. Sessions judge, Kheda at Nadiad, passed in Criminal Appeal No. 102 of 1980 on 9- 9-1981 confirming the order of conviction passed by the learned Chief Judicial magistrate, Nadiad on 9-10-1980 in Cri. Case No. 769 of 1979 and modifying the order of sentence by allowing the appeal partly. By the order of the learned chief Judicial Magistrate, Nadiad, the petitioner has been held guilty for the offences under Secs. 7 (1) (3) (5) read with Secs. 16 (A) (i) (ii) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") and the petitioneraccused was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,500. 00, in default of payment of fine, to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for three months. In appeal, the order of sentence has been modified by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Nadiad and the petitioner-accused was ordered to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months instead of six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000. 00 instead of fine of Rs. 1500. 00, in default of pa
























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top