Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
J.M.KHAZI
Rohit Jawa, Son of Ved Prakash Jawa, Represented By The Managing Director – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka, Through Food Safety Officer, Represented By State Public Prosecutor, High Court Of Karnataka – Respondent
ORDER :
(J.M. KHAZI, J.)
In this petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C, petitioner who is arraigned as accused No.2 has sought for quashing criminal proceedings initiated against him in C.C.No.57/2023 on the file of Spl.Court for economic offences and set aside the impugned order dated 26.06.2023, taking cognizance for the offences punishable and Sections 51 and 59 of Food and Safety Standards Act, 2006.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to by their ranks before the trial Court.
3. In support of the petition, petitioner has contended that he is the Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer of Hindustan Unilever Ltd. Respondent No.1 who is the Food Safety Officer, Hebbal Circle has filed the complaint alleging that in respect of food supply of Horlicks biscuits purportedly collected from the premises of respondent No.2, the sample was found unsafe and it contained pesticide Chloropyrifos beyond the specified limits and as such substandard and unsafe for human consumption. The tests prescribed under Food, Safety and Standards (Contaminants, Toxins and Residues) Regulations, 2011 are applicable only to raw ingredients and not finished products. Without due app
A Managing Director cannot be prosecuted under the Food Safety Act without the company being a party to the proceedings, as vicarious liability requires both to be present in court.
Partners of a firm are not liable for offences under the Food Safety Act unless specific allegations of their involvement are made.
Prosecution against individuals for corporate offenses is improper without including the company as a party to the proceedings, as established in the Essential Commodities Act, 1955.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the prosecution for an offense under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 must be filed within the prescribed time limit, and the absence o....
A company must be arraigned as an accused for vicarious liability to apply under Section 138 of the N.I. Act; thus, prosecution of directors is invalid without this requirement.
Proper arraying of the accused in a complaint is essential for prosecution under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940.
Directors who resign before the alleged offense cannot be held vicariously liable under food safety laws without specific allegations of their involvement at the time of the offense.
The absence of the manufacturer as an accused in food safety violations renders prosecution against the licensee untenable, violating procedural requirements of the FSS Act.
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
