22 October 2008
Supreme Court
Download

GOVARDHAN DASS BANSAL Vs STATE (DELHI ADMINISTRATION)TH.SECRETARY

Bench: ARIJIT PASAYAT,C.K. THAKKER,LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA
Case number: Crl.A. No.-000055-000055 / 2002
Diary number: 8156 / 2001
Advocates: T. HARISH KUMAR Vs D. S. MAHRA


1

    REPORTABLE

       IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA    CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL  APPEAL No. 55  OF 2002        

GOVERDHAN DASS BANSAL ...   Appellant(s)                         Versus    STATE (DELHI ADMINISTRATION) TH. SECRETARY ...  Respondent(s)

J U D G M E N T

Dr.ARIJIT PASAYAT,J.

Heard.

Challenge in this appeal is to the order passed by a learned Single Judge of

the  Delhi  High  Court  in  Criminal  revision  No.  206/2001.   The  appellant  was

prosecuted for offences punishable under Sections 7 and 16 of the Food Adulteration

Act,  1954  (in  short  the  'Act').  The  allegation  was  that  on  13.10.1988  the  Food

Inspector found that the appellant was selling adulterated chilly powder.  On that

basis, sample which was collected was sent to the public analyst and it was found that

percentage of Ash insoluble in dilute HCL was at 4.2%  as against the permissible

limit of 1.35%.  The trial court found the appellant guilty.  In appeal, the conclusion

of the trial court was upheld.  A criminal revision was filed before the High Court

which was admitted.  But  on  the  day the  appeal was  admitted, the

-2-

revision petition was disposed  of  by a cryptic and practically non-reasoned order.

2

That is not the way to dispose of a revision petition which has been admitted.  If there

was no substance, it should not have been admitted.  Since it was admitted, the Court

obviously felt that there was some arguable point.  Thereafter to dismissed it without

indicating any reason or basis is certainly not the proper way of disposal.

Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order of the High Court and remit

the matter to the High Court for fresh disposal in accordance with law.  

It is stated that the appellant is continuing on bail pursuant to the order

passed by this Court.  The same shall continue till the disposal of the revision by the

High Court.  We make it clear that by granting this interim protection, we have not

expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.

The appeal is accordingly disposed of.

              ...................J.                                  (Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT)  

       

             ....................J.                          (C.K.THAKKER)

    .....................J      (LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA)

            

New Delhi, October 22, 2008.