Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
ABHAY S.OKA, AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, JJ.
Pepsico India Sales Private Limited Formerly M/s Aradhana Drinks And Beverages Private Limited & Anr. – Appellants
VERSUS
The Union Territory of Chandigarh & Anr. – Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 4510 of 2024 (Arising Out of Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 10280 of 2024) With Criminal Appeal No. 4511 of 2024 (Arising Out of Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 10306 of 2024)
Decided On : 08-11-2024
Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 - Section 52(1) - Quashing of complaints - The respondents agreed to quash complaints upon payment of maximum penalty of Rs.3,00,000/- by the appellants - The appellants consented to pay the penalty, leading to the quashing of Complaint Case Nos.315 and 316 of 2004 pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chandigarh. (Paras 3-8)
Facts of the case:
The respondents filed counter affidavits indicating willingness to quash complaints if the penalty was paid. The appellants admitted to the penalty payment.
Findings of Court:
The complaints will stand quashed upon the deposit of the penalty amount.
Issues: The main issue was whether the complaints could be quashed upon payment of the penalty.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the complaints could be quashed subject to the condition of penalty payment.
Result: Appeals allowed.
ORDER
1. Leave granted.
2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.
3. The respondents have filed a counter affidavit in which they have stated that if maximum penalty of Rs.3,00,000/- payable in terms of Section 52(1) of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 is paid by the appellant, respondents will have no objection for quashing the complaints subject matter of the appeals.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants states that the appellants will pay the penalty amount of Rs.3,00,000/- each in these two cases. It is an admitted position that the respondents have applied in the pending complaints for compounding.
5. Hence, we pass following order:
6. The complaints subject matter of these two appeals, being Complaint Case Nos.315 of 2004 and 316 of 2004 pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chandigarh, shall stand quashed subject to the appellant depositing a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- in each case with the adjudicating officer within a period of six weeks from today.
7. We make it clear that the complaints will stand quashed only subject to compliance with the requirement of deposit within the stipulated time.
8. The Appeals are allowed on above terms.
9. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
Complaints can be quashed upon payment of the maximum penalty as stipulated in the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006.
Prosecutions for food standards violations must comply with strict timelines and cannot be maintained if they are not validly sanctioned.
Separate adjudication proceedings are required for imposing penalty under Section 51 of the Food Safety and Standards Act, and prosecution for penalty under Section 51 is not maintainable.
Procedural violations in food safety regulations can lead to quashing of prosecution if they cause prejudice to the accused's rights.
An appeal against the Food Safety Appellate Tribunal's decision should be filed under Section 71(6) of the Food Safety and Standards Act, treated as a second appeal, not a writ petition.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
