9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (4) TMI 954X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der Rule 32(c) and (f) of the Rules but these provisions were not related to misbranding and were regarding something else. HELD THAT:- The Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 was repealed by the introduction of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 where Section 52 provides a maximum penalty of Rs. 3,00,000/- for misbranded food. There is no provision for imprisonment. Whether the Appellant can be granted the benefit of the new legislation and be awarded a lesser punishment as is presently prescribed under the new law? This Court in T. Barai v. Henry Ah Hoe [ 1982 (12) TMI 186 - SUPREME COURT] , had held that when an amendment is beneficial to the Accused it can be applied even to cases pending in Courts where such a provision did ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the Trial court. Appellant No. 2 and Amit Kumar Sarkar were sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months along with a fine of Rs. 1,000/- each, whereas Appellant No. 1 was directed to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/-. 3. The appeal of the Appellants against the order of conviction and sentence by the Trial Court was dismissed by the District and Sessions Judge but the conviction of Amit Kumar Sarkar, the third Accused in the case, was set aside and he was acquitted. In Revision proceedings, the High Court of Calcutta though upheld the concurrent findings of conviction but reduced the sentence of Appellant No. 2 from 6 months to 3 months simple imprisonment. 4. Brief facts leading to this appeal are that on 06.12.2000, a f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . While Appellant No. 1 was sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/-. 6. Before this Court, learned Counsel for the Appellants would argue that the entire case of the prosecution is liable to be dismissed for the simple reason that the Appellants were charged Under Rule 32(c) and (f) of the Rules but these provisions were not related to misbranding and were regarding something else. 7. All the same, this contention is totally misconceived inasmuch on the date of occurrence i.e., 06.12.2000 when the samples were taken, the provisions which were applicable were Rule 32(c) and (f) only (as the Rules had been amended vide G.S.R 422(E) dated 29.04.1987), and Rule 32 as per the Gazette Notification reads as under: 32. Package of food to carry a lab ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the time it was committed, nor can he be subjected to a sentence which is greater than the sentence which was applicable at the relevant point of time. All the same, the above provision does not prohibit this Court, to award a lesser punishment in a befitting case, when this Court is of the opinion that a lesser punishment may be awarded since the new law on the penal provision provides a lesser punishment i.e. lesser than what was actually applicable at the relevant time. The prohibition contained in Article 20 of the Constitution of India is on subjecting a person to a higher punishment than which was applicable for that crime at the time of the commission of the crime. There is no prohibition, for this Court to impose a lesser punishm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r violation of a law in force at the time of the commission of the act charged as an offence prohibits nor shall he be subjected to a penalty greater than that which might have been inflicted under the law in force at the time of the commission of the offence. It is quite clear that insofar as the Central Amendment Act creates new offences or enhances punishment for a particular type of offence no person can be convicted by such ex post facto law nor can the enhanced punishment prescribed by the amendment be applicable. But insofar as the Central Amendment Act reduces the punishment for an offence punishable Under Section 16(1)(a) of the Act, there is no reason why the Accused should not have the benefit of such reduced punishment. The Rule ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
