New Delhi: The Supreme Court bench of Justices Ajay Rastogi and Abhay S Oka has set aside conviction of a shopkeeper sentenced for food adulteration and said that the accused has the right to send the sample to Central Food Laboratory for analysis.
The bench said it is mandatory under section 13 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 for the Local (Health) Authority to forward a copy of the report of the Public Analyst to the person from whom the sample of the food has been taken.
The apex court said mandate of sub-section (2) of Section 13 is that a person to whom the report is forwarded should be informed if that is what they want hat if it is so desired. He can make an application to the court within a period of 10 days from the date of receipt of the copy of the report to get the sample analysed by the Central Food Laboratory.
"The report is required to be forwarded after institution of prosecution against the person from whom the sample of the article of food was taken. Apart from the right of the accused to contend that the report is not correct, he has the right to exercise an option of sending the sample to the Central Food Laboratory for analysis by making an application to the court within 10 days from the date of receipt of the report," the bench said.
The apex court said if a copy of the report of the Public Analyst is not delivered to the accused, his right under sub-section (2) of Section 13 of praying for sending the sample to the Central Food Laboratory will be defeated. "Consequently, his right to challenge the report will be defeated. His right to defend himself will be adversely affected," the bench said.
The case of food adulteration
The apex court was hearing an appeal filed by Narayana Prasad Sahu challenging the order of the Madhya Pradesh high court, which dismissed his revision application. The case of the prosecution is that on January 16, 2002 Sahu was selling 'chana daal' in weekly market in Kagpur when a food Inspector came there and called upon him to show licence, which he failed.
The food Inspector purchased 750 g of chana daal from him and the said quantity was divided into three parts and was sent for examination to the public analyst. The report of the public analyst showed that the chana daal was adulterated. The judicial magistrate ordered his conviction and he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay fine of Rs 1,000.
In an appeal preferred by the appellant, the Sessions Court confirmed the conviction and sentence. Sahu filed a revision application before the high court, which was dismissed in 2018.
The food adulteration laws
Food adulteration is the process of adding an unnatural or inorganic element to the food, which looks similar to the original product and is hard to distinguish, as per a report by Lawtimesjournal.
The law considers food to be adulterated when:
A vendor sells a food article to a purchaser which is not of the quality or substance and nature demanded.
Food contains an unnatural substance that is hazardous to health consumption.
Any unnatural substance is added partially or whole to the original product.
A food product is stored or packed or prepared under an unhygienic condition which makes the food unhealthy for consumption.
A food contains any poisonous substance.
The container is made up of any hazardous substance.
Color is added more than the prescribed quantity or if any other health hazardous substance is used for adding color.
Food article is preserved with any prohibited substance or preservative is used in excess amount.
