1 month ago
Orissa High Court Reduces Sentence in 1997 Adulterated Dal Case
A man in Orissa was caught selling bad masoor dal in his shop in 1997.
The court first sentenced him to six months in jail and a fine.
But later, the high court changed his punishment to just a fine of Rs 500 because the incident happened a long time ago.
The court also said he had to pay the fine within two months or go to jail for three days.
A grocery shop owner in Sundargarh was found selling adulterated masoor dal in 1997.
The trial court sentenced him to six months imprisonment and a Rs 1,000 fine.
The high court reduced the fine to Rs 500 and set aside the jail term.
The high court noted that the evidence was properly assessed and did not require interference.
The fine must be paid within two months, or the convict will face three days in jail.
- Who
- A grocery shop owner in Sundargarh, Orissa
- What
- Selling adulterated masoor dal
- Where
- Sundargarh, Orissa
- When
- December 6, 1997
- Why
- To uphold the conviction but reduce the sentence considering the time elapsed and nature of the crime
Defense Argument
Prosecution Argument
Evidence Evaluation
Defense Argument
The trial court incorrectly evaluated the evidence, and the high court should interfere.
Prosecution Argument
No interference is required as the prosecution has established the case beyond reasonable doubt.
Key facts
- Date of Incident
- December 6, 1997
- Location
- Sundargarh, Orissa
- Initial Sentence
- Six months imprisonment and Rs 1,000 fine
- Adulterated Item
- Masoor dal
- High Court Decision
- Fine reduced to Rs 500, jail term set aside
Quotes
Justice V Narasingh
Judge of the Orissa High Court
“"Taking note of the materials on record, the nature of the allegations against the petitioner (convict), who was found selling adulterated masoor dal in his grocery shop, and the submissions advanced by the learned amicus curiae, this Court is persuaded to hold that conversion of the substantive sentence into one of fine would subserve the ends of justice."”
indianexpress.com
“"The High Court noted that the evaluation of the evidence was not done in an unreasonable manner and no interference was required."”
indianexpress.com
Sources
Related news
Jefferies Favors HAL, BEL and Data Patterns Over BHEL
Telangana Schools Begin Disability Screening, Green Ratings Across State
30 judges appointed to four high courts on Saturday
Axis Energy Wins Odisha Coal Blocks for Underground Gasification
Odisha Floods Affect Over 13.44 Lakh Across Seven Districts
Odisha floods worsen as rivers rise; more rain forecast
Lightning Strikes Kill Four Women in Odisha's Sundargarh
