Boutique Litigation Law Firm - Retain Lawyers - Research based Law Firm - Complete legal services

Criminal Lawyer: The Supreme Court sets aside conviction under Food Adulteration Act - due to non-proving of delivery of public analyst report to the accused.

Supreme Court of India

Justice A S Bopanna and Justice R Banumathi

The SC was seized of an appeal against the conviction of the appellant under Prevention of Food Adulteration Act by all the three courts below. The appellant was sentenced to 6 months imprisonment and fine; which was affirmed by the High Court.

The SC {Vijendra versus State of Uttar Pradesh} holds that failure to prove the delivery of report of the analyst to the appellant under Section 13(2) of the Act is fatal to the case of the prosecution as in the absence of proof of delivery of the report, the valuable rights available to the accused to seek for reference to, within the period of 10 days, Pune Central Food Laboratory for analysis of sample in case of dissatisfaction with the report stands defeated. And it was held when the appellant is made to suffer the penal consequences, the provisions have to be construed strictly by the courts.

It was further held that the manner as to whether the sample was appropriately taken after properly stirring the milk and whether the same was sent for analysis also in such manner has not been established because the independent witness has not supported the case of the prosecution. It was further held that in order to attain homogeneity in milk products steering and churning may become necessary for getting consistency in percentage of milk solid fat and milk solid non-fat, therefore, it was held that the guilt of the accused has not been proved beyond reasonable doubt. And the conviction of the appellant was set aside, and the judgements of all three courts below consequently were also set aside by the SC. 

Leave a comment

Please note, comments must be approved before they are published