The appellant was tried for the companymission of offences punishable under Section 7 read with Section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and upon companyviction was sentenced to undergo six months R.I. besides paying the fine of Rs.
appeal No.
Rule 1 of the rules provides that the civil and criminal jurisdiction of the companyrt on the appellate side shall, except in cases where it is otherwise provided for by these rules, be exercised by division companyrt companysisting of two or more judges.
Similarly, an appeal for leave under Section 378 4 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against acquittal, wherein the accused was charged is the one, punishable with companyviction with a sentence of fine only or with a sentence of imprisonment number exceeding 2 years or with such imprisonment and fine, such appeal can also be heard by a single judge.
In a case, where an appeal is filed against an order of acquittal and the offence with which the accused was charged is punishable with an imprisonment for more than two years, the appeal has to be heard by a division bench of the High Court.
Shri D.T. Karmate, learned companynsel appearing for the appellant has submitted that the impugned judgment is liable to be set aside in view of the Bombay High Court appellate side rules, 1960.
249/1986 which was heard and allowed by a learned single judge of the High Court.
The companyviction and sentence awarded by the trial companyrt was upheld vide the judgment impugned in this appeal.
If the appeal against acquittal wherein the accused was charged relates to an offence which is punishable with a companyviction and fine or with a sentence of imprisonment number exceeding two years, such an appeal may be heard and disposed of by a single judge.
1000/. The appeal filed by the accused was allowed by the appellate companyrt vide its judgment dated 27th December, 1985.
Feeling aggrieved, the state filed crl.
