Govardhan Dass Bansal
Vs. State (Delhi Administration)Th.Secretary  INSC 1810 (22 October 2008)
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)
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.
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
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.
(Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT)
(LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA)
Pages: 1 2