CHEKKUTTY Vs. FOOD INSPECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The accused, convicted and sentenced in a case charged under S.16(1)(a)(i) read with S.2(ix)(d) and 7(ii) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (Central Act 37 of 1954), for short the Act, is the revision petitioner. The prosecution case was that the black gram dhall exposed for sale by the petitioner was misbranded as stated in Ext. P-7 report of the Public Analyst who analysed the sample.

(2.) The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the courts below jumped into a hasty conclusion that the petitioner Was guilty of the offence, of misbranding punishable under S.7(ii) of the Act. The submission of the counsel is that what led the Public Analyst to hold that the sample was misbranded was that there was presence of talc with which the dhall was seen coated. It was also argued by him that there is nothing to show that talc is a colouring material or that its presence in article of food by itself would be injurious to health. He contended that even assuming that talc is treated as a foreign material, the content of the talc present in the sample analysed did not exceed what was permitted in terms of the standard prescribed in clause A. 18.06 of Appendix B to the Rules framed under the Act.

(3.) According to S.2(ix)(d) of the Act an article of food shall be deemed to be misbranded if it is so covered, flavoured or coated, powdered or polished that the fact that it is damaged is concealed or it is given an appearance of better or of greater value than it really is. On the facts of the case it is pointed out by the counsel for the petitioner that in Ext. P-5 mahazar there is no allegation that the dhall but of which the sample was taken was coated with talc either to conceal any damage or to give an appearance of better or of greater value than it really was. In evidence Pw. 1 the Food Inspector stated that the dhall had a shining; but that is not, what, according to S.2(ix)(d) constitutes misbranding. The complaint only quotes what has been stated in Ext. P-7 report of the Public Analyst which reads as follows: