A RAJASINGH Vs. FOOD INSPECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition has been filed, praying to quash the complaint in C. C. No. 246 of 2004 on the file of Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Gobichettipalayam, Erode District.

(2.) FOURTH petitioner is a manufacturer of wheat flour, under the name and style "naga Whole Wheat Atta". It is stated in the petition that the product is of high quality and has earned goodwill in the market, which is known for its huge demand. The respondent filed a complaint in C. C. No. 246 of 2004, alleging that he obtained samples of fourth petitioner's product, by name, Naga Whole Wheat Atta, and despatched the same for examination to Food analysis Laboratory, King Institute Campus, guindy, Chennai, on 10-12-2002 and the result disclosed that there was no adulteration. However, the complaint goes to the effect that packet has been misbranded as "best within four months" instead of "best before. . . . . . . . months from manufacture or packaging".

(3.) THE gravamen of the complaint is that the above said misbranding is in violation of Rule 32 (i) of Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955, and the declaration would deceive the attention of the consumers and that only if the printing on the cover contains the brand as mentioned in the Rules, it would be in accordance with law. Hence, it is stated that the manufacturer of the food product in question has committed an offence under Section 7 (ii) read with S. 16 (1) (a) (i) read with Section 2 (ix) (k) of the prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, (in short, 'the Act') and Rule 32 (i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955, (in short, 'the Rules' ).