Fifty years ago | Oil adulteration: Tamil Nadu govt. raises legal point
safefoodmitra.com · 2023-11-09 09:48:27
High Court holding that a sale of adulterated gingelly oil by a retail trader did not amount to an offence under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act because there was a notice board put up in the shop that the oil was not fit for human consumption. Mr. Justice Khanna, Mr. Justice Mathew and Mr. Justice Alagiriswamy were on the Bench. The State’s special leave petition raised an important question under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (Central Act), whether or not the sale of an adulterated food article would amount to an offence under the Act if there was a notice board put up in the shop that the article in question was not fit for human consumption. The respondent-accused was convicted by a Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Thanjavur, on a charge of sale of adulterated gingelly oil to the Food Inspector of Thanjavur Municipality. The trial court sentenced him to a fine of Rs. 200 in default, to imprisonment of one month and also to suffer imprisonment till the raising of the court. The Sessions-Judge, Thanjavur, acquitted the respondent-accused and set aside the conviction and sentence imposed on him by the Trial Court. Thereupon the Madras High Court on appeal from the State confirmed the orders of the Sessions Judge in the view that the accused was entitled to the benefit of doubt “because of the existence of the notice board in the shop stating that the oil was not fit for human consumption and was meant for external use.” Hence the present special leave petition by the State in the Supreme Court.