Sunday, 03, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
BARE ACTS

Supreme Court (SC) Judgements on Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954

Bare Act Title Category / State
Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 Repealed Laws
 

List of Judgements

Nagarajan & Anr. Vs. State of Tamil Nadu

Judgement Date : may/2025, Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 573 SC

S.C. Garg Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.

Judgement Date : april/2025, Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 377 SC

Directorate of Revenue Intelligence Vs. Raj Kumar Arora & Ors.

Judgement Date : april/2025, Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 375 SC

Fuleshwar Gope Vs. Union of India & Ors.

Judgement Date : september/2024, Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 595 SC

A.K. Sarkar & Co. & Anr. Vs. State of West Bengal & Ors.

Judgement Date : march/2024, Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 149 SC

Ram Nath Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.

Judgement Date : february/2024, Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 106 SC

Manik Hiru Jhangiani Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Judgement Date : december/2023, Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 929 SC

Sri Mahavir Agency & Anr. Vs. State of West Bengal & Anr.

Judgement Date : april/2023, Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 332 SC

S.P. Mani and Mohan Dairy Vs. Dr. Snehalatha Elangovan

Judgement Date : september/2022, Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 730 SC

Narayana Prasad Sahu Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Judgement Date : october/2021, Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 535 SC

Brajesh Singh Vs. Sunil Arora

Judgement Date : august/2021, Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 323 SC

HINDUSTAN UNILEVER LIMITED vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

Judgement Date : november/2020, Citation : 2020 Latest Caselaw 595 SC

Headnote :

A. The Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, specifically Sections 32(F), 7(i), 16(A)(i), and Section 2(ia)(m) in conjunction with Sections 7(i) and 16(1)(a)(i) of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, along with Section 97 of the same Act and Section 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, indi...

RAGHAV GUPTA vs. STATE ( NCT OF DELHI)

Judgement Date : september/2020, Citation : 2020 Latest Caselaw 494 SC

Headnote :

The Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, along with the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955, specifically Rule 32(e), addresses the quashing of legal proceedings. In this case, a Food Inspector acquired sealed samples of Snapple Juice Drink for testing. The Public Analyst\'s report ind...

UNION OF INDIA vs. ASHOK KUMAR SHARMA

Judgement Date : august/2020, Citation : 2020 Latest Caselaw 476 SC

Headnote :

IMPORTANTDrugs and Cosmetics Act - Selling medicine without a license - Cognizance of the offense - Police Officers lack the authority to file FIRs, conduct investigations, or make arrests; such powers are exclusively held by Drug Inspectors.A. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Sections 32, 190, and 15...

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH vs. RAKESH SETHI

Judgement Date : august/2020, Citation : 2020 Latest Caselaw 471 SC

Headnote :

IMPORTANTMotor Vehicles - Special Fee for Reserved Numbers - The State Government is authorized by Parliamentary law to establish rules regarding special fees for reserved numbers.According to Section 65 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, and Rule 55-A of the Motor Vehicles Rules, 1994, the State Gove...

MEDIPOL PHARMACEUTICAL INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED vs. POST GRADUATE INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL EDUCATION AND RESEARCH

Judgement Date : august/2020, Citation : 2020 Latest Caselaw 443 SC

Headnote :

CRUCIALDrug and Cosmetic Act - Delays in Sample Testing - Delays by the Drug Authority in testing samples may invalidate proceedings under the Drug and Cosmetic Act.According to the Drugs and Cosmetics Act of 1940, Section 25(1) and the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules of 1945, Rule 85(2) - Regarding the s...

PREM CHAND vs. STATE OF HARYANA

Judgement Date : july/2020, Citation : 2020 Latest Caselaw 436 SC

Headnote :

CRUCIALFood Adulteration - The Public Analyst did not indicate that the sample was either \"infested with insects\" or \"unsuitable for human consumption\" - The High Court\'s conviction of the accused has been overturned.Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, Sections 2(1a)(f) and 16(1A) - Food...

M/S. ALKEM LABORATORIES LTD. vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

Judgement Date : november/2019, Citation : 2019 Latest Caselaw 1170 SC

Headnote :

IMPORTANTIn cases where the examination of food article contents is essential for establishing the offence of \'misbranding\', the vendor of the misbranded food article also has the right to have a sample tested.A. According to the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, Sections 2(ia)(a) and 2(i...

RAJ KUMAR vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

Judgement Date : october/2019, Citation : 2019 Latest Caselaw 937 SC

Headnote :

IMPORTANTFood Adulteration - A slight deviation from the established standard cannot be overlooked.A. Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 Section 13(2) Adulteration in Milk - The argument of a minor shortfall in Milk Solid Non-Fat is insufficient. If the standards are not met, the Court cannot...

Vijendra v. State of Uttar Pradesh

Judgement Date : july/2019, Citation : 2019 Latest Caselaw 627 SC

Headnote :

A. Under Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, and Rule 9B of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955, the conviction\'s sustainability is contingent upon the requirement to provide the accused with the Analyst\'s report. The Food Clerk asserted that the report was...

Rajendra Pralhadrao Wasnik Vs. State of Maharashtra

Judgement Date : december/2018, Citation : 2018 Latest Caselaw 931 SC

Public Interest Foundation & Ors. Vs. Union of India & ANR. [September 25, 2018]

Judgement Date : september/2018, Citation : 2018 Latest Caselaw 706 SC

Delhi Administration Vs. Vidya Gupta [APRIL 24, 2018]

Judgement Date : april/2018, Citation : 2018 Latest Caselaw 318 SC

Mohd. Hashim Vs. State of UP & Ors. [November 28, 2016]

Judgement Date : november/2016, Citation : 2016 Latest Caselaw 846 SC

Mithilesh Vs. State of NCT, Delhi [MAY 28, 2014]

Judgement Date : may/2014, Citation : 2014 Latest Caselaw 381 SC

Rupak Kumar Vs. State of Bihar & ANR. [MARCH 04, 2014]

Judgement Date : march/2014, Citation : 2014 Latest Caselaw 157 SC

Surinder Singh Vs. State of Haryana [November 13, 2013]

Judgement Date : november/2013, Citation : 2013 Latest Caselaw 787 SC

Lily Thomas Vs. Union of India & Ors. [JULY 9, 2013]

Judgement Date : july/2013, Citation : 2013 Latest Caselaw 506 SC

Thana Singh Vs. Central Bureau of Narcotics [January 23, 2013]

Judgement Date : january/2013, Citation : 2013 Latest Caselaw 75 SC

Subhash Chand Vs. State (Delhi Administration) [January 8, 2013]

Judgement Date : january/2013, Citation : 2013 Latest Caselaw 24 SC

Academy of Nutrition Improvement and Others Vs. Union of India

Judgement Date : july/2011, Citation : 2011 Latest Caselaw 489 SC

Rangku Dutta @ Ranjan Kumar Dutta Vs. State of Assam

Judgement Date : may/2011, Citation : 2011 Latest Caselaw 429 SC

Radhey Shyam Aggarwal Vs. State N.C.T. Delhi [2009] INSC 235 (6 February 2009)

Judgement Date : february/2009, Citation : 2009 Latest Caselaw 140 SC

Hardeep Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Ors. [2008] INSC 1890 (7 November 2008)

Judgement Date : november/2008, Citation : 2008 Latest Caselaw 981 SC

Mohd. Yaseen Vs. State of U.P. [2007] Insc 741 (17 July 2007)

Judgement Date : july/2007, Citation : 2007 Latest Caselaw 539 SC

Om Prakash Vs. State (Nct) of Delhi [2007] Insc 684 (5 June 2007)

Judgement Date : june/2007, Citation : 2007 Latest Caselaw 483 SC

State of Haryana Vs. Satish Kumar [2005] INSC 129 (23 February 2005)

Judgement Date : february/2005, Citation : 2005 Latest Caselaw 129 SC

State of H.P. Vs. Narendra Kumar And Anr [2004] Insc 104 (16 February 2004)

Judgement Date : february/2004, Citation : 2004 Latest Caselaw 103 SC

Jasbir Kaur & Ors Vs. Union of India & Ors [2003] INSC 403 (25 August 2003)

Judgement Date : august/2003, Citation : 2003 Latest Caselaw 398 SC

The State of Bihar & ANR Vs. Kedar Sao & ANR [2003] INSC 402 (25 August 2003)

Judgement Date : august/2003, Citation : 2003 Latest Caselaw 397 SC

Shri Ranajoy Bose Vs. Shri A.B. Roy & ANR [2002] INSC 184 (5 April 2002)

Judgement Date : april/2002, Citation : 2002 Latest Caselaw 184 SC

B.R. Kapoor Vs. State of Tamil Nadu & ANR [2001] Insc 500 (21 September 2001)

Judgement Date : september/2001, Citation : 2001 Latest Caselaw 500 SC

K. Krishna Iyer Vs. State of Kerala & ANR [1993] INSC 168 (30 March 1993)

Judgement Date : march/1993, Citation : 1993 Latest Caselaw 165 SC

Headnote :

The appellant was engaged in selling ice-sticks when a food inspector collected samples and sent one to the Public Analyst. The analyst reported that the sample contained artificial sweeteners, specifically saccharin and dulcin, deeming it adulterated. Consequently, a complaint was lodged with the J...

State of U.P. Vs. Hanif [1992] INSC 100 (31 March 1992)

Judgement Date : march/1992, Citation : 1992 Latest Caselaw 100 SC

Headnote :

The trial court found the respondent guilty of an offense under Section 7 in conjunction with Section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, sentencing him to six months of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1000, along with the standard default clause.Upon appeal, the Sessions Co...

R. Banerjee & Ors Vs. H.D. Dubey & Ors [1992] INSC 86 (13 March 1992)

Judgement Date : march/1992, Citation : 1992 Latest Caselaw 86 SC

Headnote :

The Food Inspector visited a company\'s warehouse and collected samples of orange drink and Vanaspati ghee produced by that company and another. He noted that the orange drink\'s label indicated a manufacture date of June 1988, and since the expiry date was six months from that date, he determined t...

Rajendra And Two Others Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh [1991] INSC 159 (18 July 1991)

Judgement Date : july/1991, Citation : 1991 Latest Caselaw 159 SC

Headnote :

Appellant No. 1 was found to be displaying and selling tea dust. The Food Inspector, P.W. 1, purchased a sample of the tea dust for testing. Appellant No. 1 informed P.W. 1 that the shop was operated as a partnership among the three brothers, appellants No. 1 to 3.Following the receipt of the Public...

A.K. Roy & ANR Vs. State of Punjab & Ors [1986] INSC 204 (29 September 1986)

Judgement Date : september/1986, Citation : 1986 Latest Caselaw 204 SC

Headnote :

Section 20(1) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, which addresses the cognizance and trial of offenses, stipulates that no prosecution for an offense under this Act can be initiated except by, or with the written consent of, the Central Government, the State Government, or a person aut...

Bombay Hawkers' Union & Ors Vs. Bombay Municipal Corporation & Ors [1985] INSC 146 (3 July 1985)

Judgement Date : july/1985, Citation : 1985 Latest Caselaw 146 SC

Headnote :

In the city of Bombay, there are approximately 150,000 hawkers, with one-sixth of them being women. Generally, hawkers can be categorized into three groups: those with four-wheeled carts, those who sit on the streets (around 120,000), and those who operate from stalls to sell their products. They of...

State of Maharastra Vs. Baburao Ravaji Mharulkar & Ors [1984] INSC 198 (26 October 1984)

Judgement Date : october/1984, Citation : 1984 Latest Caselaw 198 SC

Headnote :

According to the report from the Public Analyst, the ice cream sample purchased by the Food Inspector from the shop of the 4th respondent firm, whose partners are respondents 1 to 3, contained only 5.95% milk fat, which is below the minimum requirement of 10% set by paragraph A 11.02 08 of the Appen...

State of Punjab Vs. Nohar Chand [1984] INSC 108 (17 May 1984)

Judgement Date : may/1984, Citation : 1984 Latest Caselaw 108 SC

Headnote :

The respondent was engaged in the business of manufacturing fertilizers in Ludhiana under the name Messrs Varinder Agro-Chemicals (India) and sold his products through his agent, Messrs Sachdeva Enterprises in Kapurthala. After a sample collected by a Fertilizer Inspector from this agent on December...

Charanji Lal Vs. State of Punjab [1983] INSC 163 (25 October 1983)

Judgement Date : october/1983, Citation : 1983 Latest Caselaw 163 SC

Headnote :

Statutory Interpretation - The language used by the legislature does not always convey a straightforward meaning.Words and Phrases - Damage - Definition. A Food Inspector collected a sample of kutcha khoya from the appellant\'s shop, divided it into three equal portions, sealed them, and sent one po...

State of Punjab Vs. Devinder Kumar & Ors [1983] INSC 36 (7 April 1983)

Judgement Date : april/1983, Citation : 1983 Latest Caselaw 36 SC

Headnote :

Upon a complaint from the Food Inspector, who had purchased a 1.5 kg sample of vanaspati after opening one sealed tin from a total of 20 tins weighing 16.5 kg each that the vendor had for sale, criminal proceedings were initiated against the vendor, the dealer, and the manufacturer for violating sec...

Food Inspector, Municipal Corporation,Baroda Vs. Madanlal Ramlal Sharma & ANR [1982] INSC 96 (14 December 1982)

Judgement Date : december/1982, Citation : 1982 Latest Caselaw 96 SC

Headnote :

The respondent was found guilty and sentenced for an offense under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 based on a complaint that a sample of curd bought from his shop did not meet the required standards. He appealed the decision, and the Sessions Judge acquitted him on the grounds that the...

T. Barai Vs. Henry A.H Hoe & ANR [1982] INSC 92 (7 December 1982)

Judgement Date : december/1982, Citation : 1982 Latest Caselaw 92 SC

Headnote :

Under section 16(1)(a) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, as it was on March 1, 1972, the maximum penalty for an offence was six years of imprisonment and a fine. Section 21 of the Act stated that such offences were to be tried by a Presidency Magistrate or a First Class Magistrate. H...

State of Tamil Nadu Vs. S.Shanumugham Chettiar & ANR [1980] INSC 184 (22 September 1980)

Judgement Date : september/1980, Citation : 1980 Latest Caselaw 184 SC

Headnote :

According to section 2(i)(L) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (prior to its amendment in 1976), a food item is considered adulterated \"if its quality or purity falls below the established standard or if its components are present in amounts that exceed the allowed limits of variabil...

Kasambhai Ardul Rehmanbhai Shaikh Vs. State of Gujarat & ANR [1980] INSC 24 (13 February 1980)

Judgement Date : february/1980, Citation : 1980 Latest Caselaw 24 SC

Headnote :

The appellants faced prosecution for offenses under section 16(1)(a)(i) in conjunction with section 7 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954. Following the presentation of some evidence by the prosecution, a plea-bargaining process occurred involving the prosecution, the defendants, and th...

State of Tamil Nadu Vs. R. Krishnamurthy [1979] INSC 238 (15 November 1979)

Judgement Date : november/1979, Citation : 1979 Latest Caselaw 238 SC

Headnote :

The prosecution claimed that the respondent sold gingelly oil that was mixed with 15 percent groundnut oil as pure gingelly oil to the Food Inspector. The respondent\'s defense was that the oil was intended for external use and not for consumption.The Trial Magistrate rejected this defense and convi...

Ganeshmal Jashraj Vs. Govt. of Gujarat & ANR [1979] INSC 223 (30 October 1979)

Judgement Date : october/1979, Citation : 1979 Latest Caselaw 223 SC

Headnote :

The appellant faced charges under section 16(a)(1) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, for selling adulterated turmeric powder to Respondent No. 2, a Food Inspector employed by the State. Although the appellant initially pleaded not guilty and opted for a trial, he later submitted an a...

State (Delhi Administration) Vs. I. K. Nangia & ANR [1979] INSC 216 (23 October 1979)

Judgement Date : october/1979, Citation : 1979 Latest Caselaw 216 SC

Headnote :

On August 31, 1976, a Food Inspector collected a sample of \'Postman\' brand refined groundnut oil from M/s. Amar Provision & General Stores, which had been supplied by M/s. Gainda Mull Hem Raj on August 20, 1976. According to the Public Analyst\'s report dated September 9, 1976, the oil was found t...

Municipal Corporation of Delhi Vs. Tek Chand Bhatia [1979] INSC 203 (11 October 1979)

Judgement Date : october/1979, Citation : 1979 Latest Caselaw 203 SC

Headnote :

The respondent is a partner at the firm M/s. Narain Dass Tek Chand, located in Khari Baoli, Delhi, which operates in the wholesale dry fruit business, including cashew nuts sourced from various manufacturers. On August 1, 1968, food inspectors PWs 1 and 3 collected samples of cashew nuts from three...

Bal Kishan Thaper Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi [1979] INSC 65 (9 March 1979)

Judgement Date : march/1979, Citation : 1979 Latest Caselaw 65 SC

Headnote :

The appellant was a producer of a product named Para Excellent and Para Asli, which was labeled as \"as sweet as saccharin\" on the outer packaging.The label also indicated that the product was para saccharin under the usage instructions.The appellant faced prosecution under sections 2(ix)(a) and (g...

Sambhu Dayal Vs. State of U.P [1978] INSC 234 (21 November 1978)

Judgement Date : november/1978, Citation : 1978 Latest Caselaw 234 SC

Headnote :

The appellant was found guilty under section 8 in conjunction with section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate in Jalaun and was sentenced to six months of rigorous imprisonment, which is the minimum penalty stipulated by the P.O.F.A. 1950. Upon appeal, the...

State of Kerala Vs. Alaserry Mohammed [1978] INSC 25 (10 February 1978)

Judgement Date : february/1978, Citation : 1978 Latest Caselaw 25 SC

Headnote :

Rule 22 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955, established under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, outlines the required quantity of food samples to be sent to the Public Analyst or Directorate for analysis, depending on the situation. Items 1 to 22 provide a list of variou...

Eknath Shankarrao Mukkawar Vs. State of Maharashtra [1977] INSC 114 (12 April 1977)

Judgement Date : april/1977, Citation : 1977 Latest Caselaw 114 SC

Headnote :

The appellant and his father faced charges under section 2(1)(c) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 for the adulteration of chili powder. A sample of the chili powder, seized by the Food Inspector on April 13, 1974, showed a total ash content of 37.25%, significantly exceeding the perm...

Khadya Peya Vikarete Malak Sangh Vs. The Chief Officer, Sangli Municipal Council & ANR [1976] INSC 291 (19 November 1976)

Judgement Date : november/1976, Citation : 1976 Latest Caselaw 291 SC

Headnote :

Rule 2(d) of the Maharashtra Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1962, defines a manufacturer as an individual involved in producing any food item for trade purposes. Clause (e) describes a \"retail dealer\" as someone who sells food articles but is not a wholesale dealer, while clause (g) define...

Kisan Trimbak Kothula & Ors Vs. State of Maharashtra [1976] INSC 289 (17 November 1976)

Judgement Date : november/1976, Citation : 1976 Latest Caselaw 289 SC

Headnote :

Section 16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, states that if any individual, either personally or through another, stores or sells any food item that is adulterated or misbranded, they shall face penalties in addition to those under section 6, including imprisonment for a min...

Prem Ballab & ANR Vs. The State (Delhi Administration) [1976] INSC 220 (15 September 1976)

Judgement Date : september/1976, Citation : 1976 Latest Caselaw 220 SC

Headnote :

The second appellant owned a grocery store, while the first appellant worked as a salesman there. Food Inspector Bhanot collected a sample of mustard oil from the first appellant, following the required procedures outlined by the Act. The Public Analyst determined that the sample was misbranded, as...

Municipal Corporation of Delhi Vs. Laxmi Narain Tandon [1975] INSC 322 (17 December 1975)

Judgement Date : december/1975, Citation : 1975 Latest Caselaw 320 SC

Headnote :

The respondents faced charges under section 7 in conjunction with section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, on the basis that they had stored adulterated food items of inferior quality for sale.In front of the Magistrate, the respondents argued that no food items were sold to non-...

Om Prakash Vs. Delhi Administration & ANR [1975] INSC 312 (10 December 1975)

Judgement Date : december/1975, Citation : 1975 Latest Caselaw 310 SC

Headnote :

Samples of cow\'s milk were collected by the relevant officials from 6 out of several cans that the appellant was transporting in a truck, and these samples were sent for analysis. Upon discovering that the samples were adulterated, the appellant faced prosecution for an offense under section 16 in...

Municipal Corporation of Delhi Vs. Kacheroo Mal [1975] INSC 232 (29 September 1975)

Judgement Date : september/1975, Citation : 1975 Latest Caselaw 230 SC

Headnote :

The Food Inspector acquired cashew nut pieces as a sample for analysis from the respondent\'s grocery store.The sample was forwarded to the Public Analyst, who reported that the cashew nuts were infested with insects. Following the receipt of the Public Analyst\'s report, the Food Inspector initiate...

Shah Ashu Jaiwant Vs. State of Maharashtra [1975] INSC 167 (18 August 1975)

Judgement Date : august/1975, Citation : 1975 Latest Caselaw 165 SC

Headnote :

The appellant faced charges under section 16(1)(a)(1) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act for violating sections 2(1)(f) and 7(1) of the same Act. A Food Inspector purchased black til seeds from the appellant. Witness P.W. 1 Tambe could not recall the name of the shop or the approximate date...

Bhagwan Dass Jagdish Chander Vs. Delhi Administration [1975] INSC 83 (25 March 1975)

Judgement Date : march/1975, Citation : 1975 Latest Caselaw 83 SC

Headnote :

The appellant, a ghee trading company, along with its partner (referred to as A2), was accused of selling ghee to A1, the ghee vendor. A sample of the ghee purchased by the Food Inspector was found to be adulterated upon analysis. Both accused were jointly prosecuted under sections 7 and 16 of the [...

Rajal Das Guru Namal Pamanani Vs. The State of Maharashtra [1974] INSC 259 (3 December 1974)

Judgement Date : december/1974, Citation : 1974 Latest Caselaw 257 SC

Headnote :

The appellant, a grocer, sold compounded asafoetida in sealed tins obtained from a licensed manufacturer. He stored it correctly and sold it in the same condition as he received it. However, the Food Inspector collected a sample of 100 grams instead of the required 200 grams as per rule 22. Upon ana...

Bankatlal Vs. State of Rajasthan [1974] INSC 215 (17 October 1974)

Judgement Date : october/1974, Citation : 1974 Latest Caselaw 213 SC

Headnote :

The petitioner was detained under two orders issued in accordance with section 3(1)(a)(iii) of the Maintenance of Internal Security Act, 1971, on the basis that he was involved in the adulteration of essential food items and was found in possession of substances such as donkey dung, sawdust, gypsum,...

Ram Labhaya Vs. Municipal Cororation of Delhi & ANR [1974] INSC 40 (26 February 1974)

Judgement Date : february/1974, Citation : 1974 Latest Caselaw 40 SC

Headnote :

The appellant faced charges under section 16(7) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 for mixing foreign starches with haldi. The Magistrate acquitted him on the basis that the sample was not collected by the Food Inspector in the presence of independent witnesses, which constituted a fai...

Arvind Mohan Sinha Vs. Amulya Kumar Biswas & Ors [1974] INSC 12 (17 January 1974)

Judgement Date : january/1974, Citation : 1974 Latest Caselaw 12 SC

Headnote :

The inquiry pertains to (1) the applicability of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, to offenses under the Customs Act, 1962, as well as those offenses specified in Part XII-A of the Defence of India Rules, 1962, which address Gold Control, and (2) whether smuggled gold is excluded from the provis...

Vijay Kumar Vs. State of Punjab [1973] INSC 244 (14 December 1973)

Judgement Date : december/1973, Citation : 1973 Latest Caselaw 244 SC

Headnote :

The appellant operates a sweet shop in a village located in Punjab.The food inspector collected a sample of \'Elachi Dana\' that was available for sale by the appellant, and the Public Analyst\'s report revealed that the sample was contaminated with insects at a rate of 9.7 percent, and the volatile...

Pyarali K. Tejani Vs. Mahadeo Ramchandra Dange & Ors [1973] INSC 196 (31 October 1973)

Judgement Date : october/1973, Citation : 1973 Latest Caselaw 196 SC

Headnote :

The appellant, a dealer in scented supari, faced charges for selling and possessing scented supari containing saccharin and cyclamate, which are prohibited artificial sweeteners, in violation of Section 7(i)(ii) and Rule 47 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954. This constituted an offens...

Chittaranjan Das Vs. The State of Orissa [1973] INSC 169 (18 September 1973)

Judgement Date : september/1973, Citation : 1973 Latest Caselaw 169 SC

Headnote :

Section 20(1) of the Food Adulteration Act, 1954, prior to its amendment by Act 49 of 1964, stipulated that no prosecution for an offence under the Act could be initiated without the written consent of the State Government, a local authority, or an individual authorized by either the State Governmen...

V. N. Kamdar & ANR Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi [1973] INSC 103 (1 May 1973)

Judgement Date : may/1973, Citation : 1973 Latest Caselaw 103 SC

Headnote :

R, who faced charges under section 16 in conjunction with section 7 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, testified in court that he had acquired the curry powder in question in sealed tins from the appellants, who had provided a warranty. He stated that he sold the curry powder in the s...

Ajitprasad Ramkishan Singh Vs. The State of Maharashtra [1972] INSC 131 (2 May 1972)

Judgement Date : may/1972, Citation : 1972 Latest Caselaw 131 SC

Headnote :

The appellant owned a sweet meat shop in Bombay, which he had entrusted to his nephew. A food inspector, acting under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act of 1954, collected a sample of buffalo milk from the shop. One of the three portions of the sample was given to the vendor, another was sent t...

Ishar Das Vs. State of Punjab [1972] INSC 35 (31 January 1972)

Judgement Date : january/1972, Citation : 1972 Latest Caselaw 35 SC

Headnote :

The appellant, who was under 20 years old, was found guilty of an offense under section 7(1) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, and was required to provide a bond in accordance with section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958. The High Court modified the sentence because section...

Jagdish Prasad Alias Jagdish Prasad Gupta Vs. State of West Bengal [1971] INSC 344 (13 December 1971)

Judgement Date : december/1971, Citation : 1971 Latest Caselaw 344 SC

Headnote :

The appellant, who managed an Oil Mill, was found guilty under section 7(i)/16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, and received a sentence of one year of rigorous imprisonment.His appeal to the Sessions Judge was unsuccessful, and a subsequent revision to the High Court was al...

Food Inspector, Calicut Corporation Vs. Cherukattil Gopalan & ANR [1971] INSC 147 (6 May 1971)

Judgement Date : may/1971, Citation : 1971 Latest Caselaw 147 SC

Headnote :

A transaction involving the sale of food for analysis qualifies as a \"sale\" under section 2(xiii) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954. If a food item sold to a Food Inspector is found to be adulterated, the accused can be charged with an offense under section 16(1)(a)(i) in conjunctio...

Dwarka Nath & ANR Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi [1971] INSC 125 (23 April 1971)

Judgement Date : april/1971, Citation : 1971 Latest Caselaw 125 SC

Headnote :

The appellants were engaged in the business of selling ghee. The labels on their ghee tins included the name of their business and the postal division, but they did not provide the premises number or the specific locality of their business. As a result of this non-compliance with the packing and lab...

Ram Dayal Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi & ANR [1969] INSC 270 (7 October 1969)

Judgement Date : october/1969, Citation : 1969 Latest Caselaw 270 SC

Headnote :

The appellant was found guilty of selling food containing prohibited coloring agents. He argued that his request to summon the Public Analyst for cross-examination was denied, which he claimed prejudiced him and invalidated the entire proceedings against him. The High Court dismissed this argument,...

Ranganatha Reddiar Vs. The State of Kerala [1969] INSC 184 (14 August 1969)

Judgement Date : august/1969, Citation : 1969 Latest Caselaw 184 SC

Headnote :

A complaint was made against the appellant, who possessed a wholesaler\'s license, alleging that he had stored and sold compounded asafoetida that was found to be adulterated. The appellant argued that he had acquired the asafoetida from a distributor in sealed packets, and the cash memo provided by...

Dhian Singh Vs. Municipal Board, Saharanpur [1969] INSC 161 (31 July 1969)

Judgement Date : july/1969, Citation : 1969 Latest Caselaw 161 SC

Headnote :

A complaint was filed with the Magistrate based on a report from the Public Analyst indicating that the colored sweets sold by the appellant were adulterated, in accordance with section 7, in conjunction with section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. The trial court found the appellant...

Municipal Corporation of Delhi Vs. Jagdish Lal Son of Radhakishan & ANR [1969] INSC 142 (27 May 1969)

Judgement Date : may/1969, Citation : 1969 Latest Caselaw 142 SC

Headnote :

A complaint was lodged under section 7 in conjunction with section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1964 against the respondent. This complaint was submitted by the Municipal Prosecutor, who had been authorized to do so by a resolution from the appellant corporation in accordance with...

Pyare Lal Vs. New Delhi Municipal Committee & ANR [1967] INSC 122 (20 April 1967)

Judgement Date : april/1967, Citation : 1967 Latest Caselaw 122 SC

Headnote :

The petitioners were vendors selling potato chops and other food items on public streets. Initially, the New Delhi Municipal Committee granted them licenses for a period of time, but later attempted to relocate them to alternative sites for their business. Ultimately, on April 30, 1965, the Committe...

Municipal Corporation of Delhi Vs. Ghisa Ram [1966] INSC 253 (23 November 1966)

Judgement Date : november/1966, Citation : 1966 Latest Caselaw 256 SC

Headnote :

The Food Inspector from the appellant-Municipality collected a curd sample from the respondent\'s shop to test for adulteration. This sample was divided into three equal portions, placed in separate bottles, and sealed. One bottle was given to the respondent, while another was sent to the Public Ana...

M. V. Krishnan Nambissan Vs. State of Kerala [1966] INSC 18 (18 January 1966)

Judgement Date : january/1966, Citation : 1966 Latest Caselaw 18 SC

Headnote :

The appellant, who managed a dairy farm, faced charges under sections 7 and 16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, in conjunction with rule 44 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955. He was accused of selling skimmed thick buttermilk that was found to be adulterate...

M/S. Baburally Sardar & ANR Vs. Corporation of Calcutta [1965] INSC 264 (29 November 1965)

Judgement Date : november/1965, Citation : 1965 Latest Caselaw 264 SC

Headnote :

Samples of a specific brand of tinned condensed milk were collected from the appellants\' store by the Food Inspector. The Public Analyst determined that the fat content of the condensed milk was below the required standard. When prosecuted under section 16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulter...

Jagdish Prasad Vs. State of U.P [1965] INSC 105 (15 April 1965)

Judgement Date : april/1965, Citation : 1965 Latest Caselaw 105 SC

Headnote :

The appellant, previously convicted under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 for selling food in an uncovered container, faced a second conviction for selling food that had been dyed with a prohibited colorant. The Trial Court classified this as a \"second offence\" under section 16(1) of...

Hamdard Dwakhana (Wake), Delhi & ANR Vs. Union of India & Ors [1964] INSC 269 (23 November 1964)

Judgement Date : november/1964, Citation : 1964 Latest Caselaw 269 SC

Headnote :

The appellants produce a medicated syrup known as \"Sharbat Rooh Afza,\" which is made according to a specific formula and includes various fruit juices. Under section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, the Central Government established the Fruit Products Order in 1955. Following an amendmen...

M. Vs. Joshi Vs. M. U. Shimpi & ANR [1961] INSC 71 (27 February 1961)

Judgement Date : february/1961, Citation : 1961 Latest Caselaw 71 SC

Headnote :

The appellant was found to be selling butter that did not meet the required standards. He was convicted under section 16(1) in conjunction with section 7(1) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, and was sentenced to two months of rigorous imprisonment along with a fine of Rs. 250/-. He a...

The State of Bombay Vs. Parshottam Kanaiyalal [1960] INSC 133 (31 August 1960)

Judgement Date : august/1960, Citation : 1960 Latest Caselaw 133 SC

Headnote :

A complaint was lodged against the respondent by the Food Inspector for selling adulterated milk. According to Section 20(1) of the Food Adulteration Act, 1954, no prosecution can be initiated under the Act \"except by, or with the written consent of, the State Government or local authority or a per...

The State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Khushi Ram [1960] INSC 63 (1 April 1960)

Judgement Date : april/1960, Citation : 1960 Latest Caselaw 63 SC

Headnote :

The respondent faced prosecution for violations under section 7 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954. The Magistrate determined that the offences were proven and noted that this was the respondent\'s third offence, which made him subject to a minimum imprisonment sentence of two years an...