Case Note & Summary
The State of Maharashtra appealed against the judgment and order dated 5/3/1993 of the Metropolitan Magistrate, 6th Court, Mazgaon, in Criminal Case No.117/S/88, which acquitted the respondent Mallya Ramswami Konada of offences under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954. The case arose from an incident on 20/8/1985 when complainants S.K. Sawant and S.G. Darme found the accused tampering with Government Scheme milk bottles and adulterating them with water. 67 bottles of milk along with a sealing device and caps with red strips were seized. A sample of milk from two identical bottles was taken and sent to the Public Analyst, who reported that the pasteurised standardised milk did not conform to prescribed standards. The accused pleaded not guilty. The trial court acquitted the accused, and the State appealed. The High Court examined the sampling procedure and found that the prosecution failed to prove that the milk samples were taken from two separate bottles as required under Rule 14 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955. The evidence showed that the Food Inspector took samples from two bottles but did not specify that they were separate; the bottles were identical and the sample was taken from a mixture. The court held that non-compliance with mandatory sampling rules vitiates the prosecution. The appeal was dismissed and the acquittal was upheld.
Headnote
A) Prevention of Food Adulteration - Sampling Procedure - Rule 14 of Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955 - Non-Compliance - The court considered whether the sampling procedure complied with Rule 14, which requires that samples be taken from separate containers and not from a mixture. The prosecution failed to prove that the milk samples were taken from two separate bottles as required. The court held that non-compliance with mandatory sampling rules vitiates the prosecution and acquittal is justified (Paras 4-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the acquittal of the accused for offences under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 was proper given the alleged non-compliance with sampling procedures under Rule 14 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the acquittal of the accused.
Law Points
- Sampling procedure under Prevention of Food Adulteration Act
- 1954
- Rule 14 of Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules
- 1955
- Non-compliance with mandatory sampling rules
- Acquittal upheld
