Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, a manufacturer of sugar boiled confectionery products like 'Kaccha Mango Bite' and 'Mazelo', filed a writ petition challenging the seizure and sealing of its products and raw material by food safety authorities. The respondents had acted on grounds that the products contained impermissible lactic acid and excess synthetic colour, issuing multiple notices and conducting search and seizure across Maharashtra in October 2012. The petitioner sought certiorari to quash the notices, prohibition against further action based on lactic acid, mandamus to withdraw the actions, and a direction to follow due process. During pendency, the respondents stated that out of 48 seized batches, 39 conformed to colour limits and only 9 exceeded. On that aspect, the court directed the respondents to follow the prescribed procedure under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, Rules, and Regulations for those nine batches. The main legal issue, whether lactic acid is a permissible ingredient in sugar boiled confectionery under the said Act and the Food Safety and Standards (Food Products Standards & Food Additives) Regulations, 2011, was examined with reference to the definition of food additive and Regulation 2.7.1. The petitioner argued that lactic acid is a permitted food additive, while the respondents contended otherwise. The court heard submissions on that point, but the available excerpt ends before a final ruling on the permissibility of lactic acid. Thus, the decision remains partial, and the core question of lactic acid's legality was not finally determined in the provided text.
Headnote
A) Food Law - Food Additives - Permissibility of Lactic Acid in Sugar Boiled Confectionery - Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, Section 3(1)(k); Food Safety and Standards (Food Products Standards & Food Additives) Regulations, 2011, Regulation 2.7.1 - The core legal question was whether lactic acid is a permitted ingredient in sugar boiled confectionery under the Act and Regulations. The petitioner argued that lactic acid is a permissible food additive and falls within the permitted additives in the regulations including Appendix A. The respondents contended that it is not a permissible ingredient. The court analyzed the definitions and regulations to determine the issue, but the final holding is not provided in this excerpt. (Paras 5, 9, 10) B) Food Law - Sampling and Seizure - Due Process Requirements for Analysis of Food Samples - Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, Sections 28, 47(1)(c)(iii) - Regarding the ground of excess colour, the respondents admitted that out of 48 batches seized, 39 were within permissible limits and 9 exceeded. The court ordered that for those 9 batches, the respondents must follow the prescribed procedure under the Act, Rules, and Regulations. The petitioner's grievances about the manner of sampling and analysis were not examined in view of the respondents' statement. (Paras 6, 7)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the use of lactic acid is impermissible under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, Rules and Regulations.
Final Decision
The court ordered that for nine batches out of forty-eight, where excess colour was found, the respondents shall follow the prescribed procedure under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, Rules, and Regulations. The legality of lactic acid usage was under consideration, but the final determination is not recorded in the available excerpt.
Law Points
- Legal points not extracted
- Definition of food additive under Section 3(1)(k) of Food Safety and Standards Act
- 2006
- Regulation 2.7.1 of Food Safety and Standards (Food Products Standards & Food Additives) Regulations
- 2011 governing sugar boiled confectionery
- requirement of due process for sampling and analysis under the Act
- Section 28 recall of stock
- Section 47 opportunity for analysis of sample
