Punjab-Haryana High Court
Palwinder Singh vs State Of Punjab on 8 September, 2022
235
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRR No.1691 of 2019
Date of decision : 08.09.2022
Palwinder Singh
....Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab
...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN
Present : Mr. Parampreet S. Paul, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Ms. Kanica Sachdeva, Asstt. Advocate General, Punjab
for the respondent/State.
PANKAJ JAIN, J. (ORAL)
Petitioner is in appeal against the order passed by Additional
Sessions Judge, Rupnagar, dated 12th of July, 2019 whereby judgment of
conviction and order of sentence passed against the petitioner for offences
punishable under Sections 52 and 59 of the Food Safety and Standards Act,
2006 (for short, '2006 Act') has been affirmed.
2. As per the allegations levelled against the petitioner, 20 litres
of carbonated water was found in his premises. The content of sugar
therein was 183.2 ppm instead of 100 ppm which is the maximum
prescribed limit. Complaint under Sections 52 and 59 of the 2006 Act was
filed by an authorized person. Trial Court found that :-
"17. Therefore, taking into consideration, the report of
1 of 4
analyst i.e. Dated 5.6.2015 prepared by Food Analyst, Punjab
Chandigarh on the basis of sample taken from the premises of
accused was found to be 'misbranded and unsafe'. Moreover,
accused was the manufacturer of the sweetened carbonated
water, found to be unsafe and misbranded.
18. Thus, in the light of above said discussion, the
prosecution has remained successful in bringing home the
guilt of the accused under Sections 52 and 59 of Food Safety
& Standards Act, 2006. So, accused is held guilty under
Sections 52 and 59 of Food Safety & Standards Act, 2006.
Let the accused be taken into custody and be heard on
question of sentence."
And, he was awarded following sentence :
Offence under Section Sentence
U/s 52 of Food Safety To pay penalty of Rs.30,000/- and
and Standards Act, 2006 in default of payment of fine, he
will further undergo R.I. for one
month.
U/s 59 of Food Safety To undergo R.I. for two months
and Standards Act, 2006 and to pay fine of Rs.25,000/-. In
default of payment of fine, he will
further undergo R.I. for one
month
3. The judgment and the order of sentence was taken in appeal
before the Appellate Court by the petitioner. The Ld. Appellate Court
affirmed the same maintaining the sentence awarded by the Trial Court.
Hence, this revision petition.
4. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner submits that he does not wish to
argue the merits of the case but prays for reduction of the sentence and
2 of 4
modification thereof from two months R.I. awarded by the Trial Court to
the period already undergone i.e. 25 days. In support of his contention, he
relies upon the judgment passed by this Court in CRR No.1337 of 2019
titled as Isrile and others, CRR No.1353 of 2008 titled as Raghunath vs.
State of Punjab, wherein the petitioners have been granted similar relief.
He further contends that though the allegation against the petitioner relates
to offence under Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, yet it is not the case
of the prosecution that the carbonated water found from his premises was
unfit for human consumption. He also submits that the petitioner is 45 years
of age. He is sole bread winner of his family comprising of his ailing father
and two minor children.
5. I have heard Ld. Counsel for the parties and have gone through
the records of the case.
6. The petitioner is first time offender and is not involved in any
other case. The complaint relates to the year 2016. He has already suffered
protracted ordeal of criminal litigation for 6 years. Taking into
consideration all the aforesaid facts, the sentence awarded to the petitioner
by the Trial Court is modified from 2 months R.I. to 25 days i.e. the period
he has already undergone of actual sentence. The sentence w.r.t. penalty
awarded by the Trial Court is maintained. Thus, now the order of sentence
is modified to the following extent:-
3 of 4
Offence under Section Sentence
U/s 52 of Food Safety and To pay penalty of Rs.30,000/- and
in default of payment of fine, he
Standards Act, 2006
will further undergo R.I. for 25
days (already undergone).
U/s 59 of Food Safety and To undergo R.I. for 25 days
Standards Act, 2006 (already undergone) and to pay
fine of Rs.25,000/-. In default of
payment of fine, he will further
undergo R.I. for one month
7. Both the sentences shall run concurrently.
8. The revision petition is accordingly disposed off in the
aforesaid terms.
September 08, 2022 (PANKAJ JAIN)
Dpr JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
4 of 4
