Title: Bheru Jat vs. State of Rajasthan
Date of Decision: September 20, 2023
Case ID: S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 759/2003
Presiding Judge: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldeep Mathur
Intro:
The case involves a criminal revision petition filed by Bheru Jat, the petitioner, against his conviction under Section 7/16 of the Food Adulteration Act. The judgment of conviction was passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gangapur, Bhilwara, and subsequently upheld by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhilwara. The petitioner sought a reduction in his sentence due to the protracted nature of the legal proceedings.
Facts:
In 1987, Bheru Jat, the petitioner, who was involved in the business of selling milk, was stopped by a Food Inspector near Shivrate Gate, Gangapur. The Food Inspector purchased 750 ml of milk from him and sent it for chemical examination, which revealed that the milk was adulterated. Consequently, the petitioner was tried for the offenses related to food adulteration, and he was convicted by the competent criminal court on December 5, 2002. The trial court sentenced him to six months of simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1,000, with an additional one-month imprisonment in case of default in fine payment.
The petitioner filed an appeal against this judgment, but the appellate court upheld his conviction and sentence on August 1, 2003. Subsequently, the petitioner filed this criminal revision petition challenging his conviction and seeking a reduction in the sentence due to the prolonged legal proceedings.
Judgment:
The High Court, after considering the submissions of both parties and the prolonged nature of the case, decided to partially allow the revision petition. While maintaining the petitioner’s conviction for the offense under Section 7/16 of the Food Adulteration Act, the Court reduced his sentence to the period of imprisonment already served by him.
The Court noted that the alleged incident occurred in 1987, and the revision petition had been pending since 2003. It cited precedents from the Supreme Court emphasizing that sentencing should consider the gravity of the crime, motive, nature of the offense, and all attendant circumstances.
As a result, the petitioner’s sentence was reduced to the time he had already spent in custody. Since the petitioner was on bail, he was not required to surrender, and his bail bonds were discharged. All pending applications were disposed of, and the record of the case was directed to be sent back to the lower court.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Written by Yagya Agarwal
