1. Appeal against acquittal under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act concerning the alleged adulteration of a cow milk sample. (Para 2 )
Back
Next 
1994 Supreme(SC) 506
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
K.Jayachandra Reddy : Yogeshwar Dayal
Administrator Of The City Of Nagpur
Versus
Laxman
Case No. : 132 of 1986
Date of Decision : 5/4/94
The court held that if the fat percentage and total solids of a milk sample exceed prescribed standards, a shortfall in S.N.F. does not necessarily establish adulteration sufficient to overturn an acquittal based on the benefit of doubt.
Headnote:(A) Prevention of Food Adulteration Act - Adulteration of cow milk - Sample analysis - Fat percentage 6% against standard of 3.5% and total solids 13.37 meeting satisfying standard - S.N.F. 7.3% against standard of 8.5% - Benefit of doubt given to respondent - Acquittal upheld. (Para 2)
Facts of the case:
An appeal was filed against the acquittal of a small milk vendor. The sample of cow milk tested showed a fat percentage of 6% against a standard of 3.5% and total solids of 13.37, which was more than the satisfying standard. However, the S.N.F. was found to be 7.3% where it ought to have been 8.5%.
Findings of Court:
The court found that since the fat percentage and total solids were above the prescribed standards, the courts below did not err in acquitting the respondent by granting the benefit of doubt.
Issues: Whether the sample of cow milk was adulterated so as to attract the penal provisions of the Act.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the fat percentage and total solids of a milk sample exceed the prescribed standards, a shortfall in S.N.F. may not be sufficient to overturn an acquittal based on the benefit of doubt.
Result: Appeal dismissed.
Legal Category Hierarchy
-
crime and sentencing
-
regulatory offences
- food adulteration (Para 2)
-
regulatory offences
Table of Contents
2. Whether the cow milk sample was adulterated to attract the penal provisions of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. (Para 2 )
3. The sample's fat and total solids exceeded standards, while S.N.F. was lower, justifying the lower court's decision to grant the benefit of doubt. (Para 2 )
4. Acquittal is sustainable where sample parameters largely exceed standards, and minor shortfalls in specific components justify granting the benefit of doubt. (Para 2 )
5. Appeal dismissed. (Para 2 )
6. Does a shortfall in one parameter, such as S.N.F., automatically establish adulteration if other parameters exceed standards?
No, if the fat percentage and total solids are higher than the prescribed standards for cow milk, a shortfall in S.N.F. may not be sufficient to prove adulteration. (Para 2 )
7. Under what circumstances can a vendor be granted the benefit of doubt in a food adulteration case?
The benefit of doubt can be granted when the sample's overall composition is satisfactory or exceeds standards, despite a shortfall in a specific parameter. (Para 2 )
(1) HEARD learned counsel for the parties,
(2) THIS appeal against acquittal arises under Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. The whole question is whether the sample of cow milk is adulterated so as to attract the penal provision of the Act. Learned Magistrate who acquitted the respondent who was a small milk vendor noted that the fat percentage is 6% as against 3.5% which is more than the standard prescribed for cow milk. The only shortfall was that S.N.F. was 7.3% where it ought to have been 8.5%. Further, it noted that the total solids are 13.37 which is again more than the satisfying standard of cow milk. Under these circumstances, we cannot say that courts below have erred in acquitting them giving the benefit of doubt to the respondents. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed. However, other questions of law which have been debated by the courts below do not really matter, therefore, we do not propose to examine the same.
