STATE OF H.P. Vs. RAJA RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The basic question involved in the present case is whether country liquor falls within the definition of/Food* as contained infection 2 (v) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, (for brief, "the Act") or under any Rule framed thereunder. The matter came before a Division Bench on a. reference made by one of us (V. K Mehrotra, X).

(2.) In M/s. Associated Distilleries Pvt Ltd. Hissar, Haryana: v. State of H P., (1989 (II) Food Adulteration Cases 180), a learned Single Judge of this Court (Bhawani Singh, J) took the view that country liquor is not food within the meaning of that term under the Act so that the institution of proceedings against applicant M/s Associated Distilleries Pvt. Ltd. under the provisions of the Act was unsustainable in law. The proceedings were quashed by the learned Judge in exercise of the powers under section 482, Cr. P. C. .

(3.) The learned Judge, in the course of his judgment in the case aforesaid, observed thus: " .Alcoholic beverages have not been included in the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act by the legislature. It only contains non -alcoholic beverages. Under alcoholic beverages (A.29), only toddy has been included (A 29.01) which indicates that no other alcoholic beverages, including liquor, have been included as an item of food. It is, in fact, consumed as an intoxicant and not as food speciality. That may be a reason of its non -inclusion by tbe legislature, Reference to A. 01 and items following thereunder gives strength to come to this conclusion,"