SHAPIRO, J.
Gilbert S. Rosenthal for defendant. Louis Roos and James F. Linsky for plaintiff. SHAPIRO, J. Defendant is charged with violating section 421 of the Penal Law, which so far as here material reads: "Any person * * * who, with intent to sell or in any wise dispose of * * * service or anything offered by such person * * * directly or indirectly, to the public for sale or distribution, or with intent to increase the consumption thereof, or to induce the public in any manner to enter into any obligation relating thereto * * * makes, publishes, disseminates, circulates, or places before the public, or causes, directly or indirectly, to be made, published, disseminated, circulated, or placed before the public, in this state, in a newspaper, magazine or other It is further contended that since the charge against the defendant is a penal one, the statute must be strictly construed against the People, and that, applying such strict construction, the acts of the defendant do not come within its terms. The contention thus made, though frequently met in briefs of defendants in criminal cases, is only sound when applied to penal provisions found elsewhere than in the Penal Law (People v. Rosenberg, 138 N.Y. 410; People v. Thomas, 71 Misc. 339; Matter of Citrin v. Belcastro, 196 Misc. 272; People v. Snyder, 269 App. Div. 985, affd. 295 N.Y. 866), but is not well founded so far as a violation of the Penal Law is concerned, for we are abjured by that law itself (§ 21) that "The rule that a penal statute is to be strictly construed does not apply to this chapter or any of the provisions thereof, but all such provisions must be construed according to the fair import of their terms, to promote justice and effect the objects of law." It is evident that the statute before the court for construction was designed to prevent deceptive, careless or negligent conduct resulting in misrepresentation and to protect the credulous against themselves. A construction which achieves that purpose is in accord with the "fair import" of its terms, is designed "to promote justice and effect the objects of the law" and does harm only to the wrongdoer who either intentionally or carelessly puts out for public consumption deceptive, misleading or untrue advertising or other printed material. (People v. Reilly, 255 App. Div. 109, affd. 280 N.Y. 509.) Accordingly, the defendant's motion to dismiss is denied, and the defendant is held for trial in the Court of Special Sessions.