Skip to content


M/S. Brook Bond India Ltd. Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectFood Adulteration;Criminal
CourtRajasthan High Court
Decided On
Case NumberS. B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 92 of 1979
Judge
Reported in1979WLN(UC)361
AppellantM/S. Brook Bond India Ltd.
RespondentState of Rajasthan and anr.
Cases ReferredPule Ram v. State
Excerpt:
prevention of food adulteration act, 1954 sections 7 & 16 bru instant coffee--no standard prescribed for coffee blended with chicory--held, accused cannot be prosecuted for its sample being not in confirmity with prescribed standard;under the p.f.a. actor the rules no standard had been prescribed for instant coffee blended with chicory in such a case obviously no offence is made out because from the help of the standard prescribed for coffee it can not be proved that the instant coffee blended with chicory is adulterated.;i am then fore of the opinion that if the legislature in its wisdom has not prescribed any standard for instant coffee blended with chicory then one cannot be prose-cured for its sample being not in confirmity with the standard prescribed for coffee under the p.f.a...........for the disposal of this petition are that on 30-7-75 food inspector p.n. moga took sample of bru instant coffee from petitioner no. 3 and sent it for cheminal examination. the report of the chemical examiner is that the sample did not confirm to the standard prescribed for coffee. thereafter a complaint was filed against the petitioners.3 i have heard the learned counsel for the parties it is argued by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners are being prosecuted with regard to the adulteration of bru instant coffee which is a blend of coffee and chicory under the p. f.a act, 1954 and the rules thereunder, the standard has not been prescribed for instant coffee blended with chicory and, therefore, no offence is made out against the petitioners. on the other hand it is.....
Judgment:

S.N. Deedwania, J.

1. This application under Section 482 Cr. P.C. is preferred for quashing proceedings under Section 7/1, 6 P.F.A Act against the petitioners in criminal case No. 307/76 pending in the court of the Judicial Magistrate (Railway), Ajmer.

2. The facts relevant for the disposal of this petition are that on 30-7-75 Food Inspector P.N. Moga took sample of Bru Instant Coffee from petitioner No. 3 and sent it for cheminal examination. The report of the Chemical Examiner is that the sample did not confirm to the standard prescribed for coffee. Thereafter a complaint was filed against the petitioners.

3 I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties It is argued by learned Counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners are being prosecuted with regard to the adulteration of Bru Instant Coffee which is a blend of coffee and chicory Under the P. F.A Act, 1954 and the rules thereunder, the standard has not been prescribed for instant coffee blended with chicory and, therefore, no offence is made out against the petitioners. On the other hand it is argued by the learned Counsel for the non petitioners that this question requires investigation into the facts and, therefore, the proceedings cannot be quashed. I hive considered the rival contention carefully. It could not be disputed that under the P. F. A Act or the Rules no standard had been prescribed for instant coffee blended with chicory. In such a case obviouly no offence is made out because from the help of the standard prescribed for coffee it can not, be proved that the instant coffee blended with chicory is adulterated I am fortified in my view by the observations made in the case of Azad Ahmed v. State 1978 FAJ. 417; wherein it was held that if no standard has been prescribed, the prosecution cannot be sustained. It is not permissible by inference to read in the rules something which is not there. To the same effect are the obervations in the case of Pule Ram v. State 1976 FAJ, 203:

Held that there is no reason why an article of food for which no standard has been laid down under the P F A. Rules, 1955, would be compared with articles of food for which standards have been laid down in order to find out whether there has been a violation of the standard or not. This would result in the court legislating and laying down the standard of articles of food for which admit. tedly no standard has been laid down.

4. I am therefore of the opinion that if the legislature in its wisdom has not prescribed any standard fur instant coffee blended with chicory then one cannot be prosecuted for its sample being not in confirmity with the standard prescribed for coffee under the P. F. A. Rules.

5. In the result the petition is accepted and the proceedings against the petitioners in criminal case No. 307 of 1976 pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate (RLY) Ajmer are hereby quashed.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //