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

HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
SHAM SUNDER – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF HARYANA – Respondent


Crl. Revision No. 2468 of 2013 (O&M)

-1 -

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH.

Crl. Revision No. 2468 of 2013 (O&M)

Date of Decision: 7.8.2013.

Sham Sunder

........Petitioner

Vs.

State of Haryana

......Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA

Present:

Mr. Anupam Gupta, Senior Advocate with

Mr. Jasmandeep, Advocate

for the petitioner.

.....

SABINA, J.

Petitioner had faced the trial qua commission of

offence punishable under Section 7/16 of Prevention of Food

Adulteration Act, 1954 ('IPC'' for short) in a complaint filed by

the State. The Trial Court vide judgment/order dated

12.8.2011 ordered the conviction and sentence of the

petitioner under Section 7 read with Section 16(1)(a)(i) of the

Act. Aggrieved against the said judgment/order of his

conviction and sentence, petitioner preferred an appeal. The

Appellate Court vide judgment dated 23.7.2013 dismissed the

appeal filed by the petitioner. Hence, the present petition by

the petitioner.

After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner,

I am of the opinion that the instant petition deserves

dismissal.

Prosecution story, in brief, is that compla

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