Back
FARJAND ALI
Kamal Kishore – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
ORDER :
Farjand Ali, J.
By way of filing the instant Criminal Revision Petition under Section 397 /401 of the Cr.P.C challenge has been made to the judgment dated 07.07.2001 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No.2, Jodhpur in Criminal appeal No.16/2000, whereby the learned appellate court affirmed the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 30.03.2000 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jodhpur in Criminal Case No.107/1995; whereby the petitioners have been convicted for the offence under Section 7 /16 of the FOOD ADULTERATION ACT , 1954 and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment of 6 months along with a fine of Rs.2,000/- with default sentence of 7 days' simple imprisonment.
2. Bereft of elaborate details, facts relevant and essential for disposal of the instant criminal revision are that on 09.10.1995, Mr. P.C. Harsh, Food Inspector, inspected the shop of the accused petitioners M/s. Rajesh Kirana and Provision Store situated at Ghantaghar, Jodhpur. Petitioner Kamal Kishore was found selling food articles. He told that the owner of the shop is Rajesh. The Food Inspector purchased 1.5 kg salt from the shop paying Rs.2.25 and took three samples of
The court upheld the conviction for food adulteration but modified the sentence to time already served due to the lengthy trial and the petitioner's circumstances.
The right to a speedy trial is fundamental; prolonged legal proceedings can justify leniency in sentencing.
The court modified the sentence for a food adulteration conviction due to the petitioner's age and lengthy trial, emphasizing the right to a speedy trial.
The court modified the sentence for food adulteration to the time already served, emphasizing the right to a speedy trial and the petitioner's lack of prior offenses.
The court emphasized the right to a speedy trial and modified the sentence based on the lengthy duration of the case and the petitioner's circumstances.
The court emphasizes the right to a speedy trial and modifies the sentence for justice based on the lengthy legal process involved.
The court upheld the conviction for food adulteration but modified the sentence to the period already undergone, emphasizing the right to a speedy trial and the petitioner's age.
The court upheld the conviction for food adulteration but reduced the sentence to time already served, emphasizing the right to a speedy trial and the petitioner's lack of prior offenses.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
