T PRABHU Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition is filed to call for the records in S. T. C. No. 1403 of 2005 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No. VII, Coimbatore, and to quash the same. The petitioners are accused for an offence punishable under Section 7 (ii) and 16 (1) (a) (i) r/w. 2 (ix) (K) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act 1954 and Rules 32 (i) of the PFA Rule 1955 in the above case.

(2.) THE learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the third petitioner is the selling agent and the first petitioner is the vendor to the second petitioner, who is running a provision store. It is the case of the prosecution that Basmathi rice in packing has been kept for sale and as per the allegations, the label contains the words "best before within 12 months from the date of packing". The date of packing has been mentioned as 26. 05. 2004. It is alleged that such language may be printed on the packing up to 01. 09. 2001 and subsequent to this date, it should be printed as "best before --------- months from packing".

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioners submits that there is no much difference between the languages of both the labels. In view of the addition of the word "within", a different meaning is not conveyed. The date of packing is mentioned as 26. 05. 2004. In addition to "best before twelve months", "within" also has been printed in the label. This could be only a minor mistake due to oversight and the petitioners were not aware of the change made by the Department and even so, the offence under Section 3 (1) of the P. F. A. Act is not made out, since the customers purchasing the packed item may not be prejudiced by reading the language on the label. The meaning conveyed by the reading "best before. . . . . . . months" and "best before and within twelve months", is one and the same and under such circumstances, one cannot imagine that merely because of the addition of the word "within", a different meaning will be conveyed to the customers.