Back
ANANYA BANDYOPADHYAY
Surendra Kumar Kapur – Appellant
Versus
Pradip Kumar Chakraborty – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. complaint origins and petitioners' non-involvement. (Para 1 , 10 , 11) |
| 2. insufficient adherence to legal inspection standards. (Para 6 , 27 , 29 , 30) |
| 3. legislative dominance of food safety act over previous laws. (Para 12 , 36 , 37 , 40) |
| 4. invalidity of charges post-repeal of applicable laws. (Para 60 , 61) |
JUDGMENT :
Ananya Bandyopadhyay, J.
1. The instant revisional application is preferred against the order dated 12th February, 2014 passed by the Learned 1st Court of Metropolitan and Municipal Magistrate, Calcutta in Case No. 2D of 2010 and for quashing the complaint dated 22nd November, 2010 filed under Section 16 (1)(a)(i) read with Sections 6 and 7 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 being Case No. 2D of 2010 pending before the Learned First Court of the Metropolitan & Municipal Magistrate, Kolkata.
2. The petitioners were brothers each above 65 years of age.
3. Petitioners were three of the sons of Late Shri Krishan Lal Kapur who during his lifetime was a well known businessman and a permanent resident of Calcutta. The petitioners’ father died on 5 January 1955. The petitioners also had an elder brother whose name was Rajendra Kumar Kapur, who die
The court found that no individual liability could be established against partners of a firm without evidence showing their control over business operations, and proceedings initiated under a repeale....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the importance of adhering to the prescribed standards and procedural requirements under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, and the ....
Criminal liability under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act requires clear evidence of managerial responsibility, which was absent in this case.
The court emphasized the compliance with the provisions of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, and the Rules, and discussed the applicability of the FSS Act, highlighting the imposition of....
The judgment emphasized the importance of placing all relevant materials before the sanctioning authority, the liability of individuals in a proprietorship concern, and the sufficiency of evidence in....
The prosecution must prove the intended use of the food, the involvement of the accused, and the adherence to sampling procedures to establish liability under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act.
The Food Inspector failed to establish the necessary jurisdictional facts for sampling, resulting in the acquittal of the accused due to reasonable doubt.
Section 20A of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act allows for the impleading of the manufacturer, distributor, or dealer during the trial of an offence under the Act if the offence was committed ....
The absence of importer information on a carbonated drink label does not amount to misbranding under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, especially where a valid trade agreement between In....
The main legal point established is the application of legal provisions related to evidence, presumption, and the applicability of amended laws to the case.
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
