The court's decision was influenced by the percentage of talc found in the food product, its purpose, and the difference between laboratory reports.

ORDER :

K.G. Balakrishnan, J.

Leave granted.

2. Heard counsel for the appellant and also counsel for the State.

3. The appellant was found guilty of an offence punishable under Sections 16(1)(a)(i) and (ii) read with Sections 7(1) and (2)(ix)(d) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954. A sample of moong dal (black gram dal) was taken from the shop of the appellant on 20-3-1989 and it was sent for chemical analysis and it was found by the Regional Analytical Laboratory at Calicut that it contained 0.28% of talc as foreign matter. The appellant was not satisfied with the report and sent the second sample to be examined by the Central Food Laboratory and the Central Food Laboratory issued a certificate dated 1-8-1989 wherein the percentage of talc was described as 1.363% and the learned Single Judge held the appellant guilty of the offence punishable under the sections as aforesaid of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act.

4. Counsel for the appellant submits that talc is not an inorganic foreign matter as it does not come within the Explanation contained in clause A.18.06.11 (sic A.18.06.10) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955 and whereas the said contention was refuted by the counsel for the State. Counsel for the appellant also contended that this is not a harmful substance and the talc was added only as preservative and to prevent the sticking of the grains of dal and therefore, the sentence of imprisonment may be converted to that of a sentence of fine.

5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case that though the certificate issued by the Central Food Laboratory supersedes the report of the Regional Analytical Laboratory, it should be noticed that the first report showed the percentage only at 0.28 which was much below the prohibited percentage. In view of the aforesaid circumstances, we hold that the sentence of imprisonment be converted into a sentence of fine and a sum of Rs 10,000 is imposed as fine. The appellant to remit the fine so imposed within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

6. The appeal is disposed of accordingly.