NILGIRI TEA EMPORIUM Vs. DELHI ADMINISTRATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is directed against order dated 6th July 1984 of a Metropolitan Magistrate, Delhi, whereby he proceeded to framed charge against the petitioners under Section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').

(2.) The facts germane to the decision of this revision petition succinctly are that on I 2th February 1982, Food Inspector Shri P.N. Khatri purchased a sample of 'Lamsa' chocolate tea from the shop of M/s. Kallu Mal Suraj Bhan, Khari Baoli, Delhi for analysis in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the Rules made thereunder. The second part of the sample was sent to the Public Analyst who, vide his report dated 16th March 1982, found that it was a case of mis-branding for not using proper label. While observing that from physical appearance the sample was of tea having added flavour of chocolate and prepared tea also gave taste and flavour of chocolate, he remarked:

(3.) The contention of the petitioners counsel precisely is that the food article in question is tea and the mere addition of chocolate thereto does not in any way change or alter its character and transform into a food stuff other than tea. In other words, it can by no stretch of reasoning be termed as a proprietory food or unconventional food for which no standard has been prescribed by the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955 (for short 'the Rules') as envisaged in Rule 37A. For ready reference the said rule is reproduced below: