MANI RAM Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant has been convicted under Sec. 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and has been sentenced to six months R.I. and a fine of Rs. 1000.00.

(2.) The applicant has been prosecuted for colouring Bengali sweets with a colour which is not permitted under the Rules. The sweets had been coloured by coaltar dye, which is prohibited under rule 29 of the rules framed under the Act.

(3.) The learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant could not be convicted as the coaltar dye, by which the Bengali sweets were coloured, was not food and thus the act of the applicant could not amount to adulteration of food. The aforesaid contention of the learned counsel is devoid of any force. Sec. 2(i)(j) defines "adulterated" as follows"-