SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

1970 Supreme(Del) 270

High Court Of Delhi
WAZIR CHAND WADHWA - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF DELHI - Respondent
CRIMINAL APPEAL 279 of 1969
Decided On : 12/07/1970

Advocates Appeared:
GHANSHYAM DAS, Y.Dayal

The mere presence of insects in food does not make it "insect-infested" within the meaning of Section 2(i)(f) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act.

Headnote:

PREVENTION OF FOOD ADULTERATION ACT - SECTION 7/16 - INSECT INFESTATION - INTERPRETATION - PRESENCE OF INSECTS ALONE DOES NOT MAKE FOOD "INSECT INFESTED" - TOLERANCE OF INSECTS UP TO 5% IS NOT ADULTERATED.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner was convicted under Section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act for selling adulterated white grams. The Public Analyst's report showed that the sample was insect-infested and contained living insects.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the mere presence of insects in food does not make it "insect-infested" within the meaning of Section 2(i)(f) of the Act. The court also held that the Public Analyst's report was reliable even though he did not carry out the test for Uric acid as required by Appendix B to the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955.

Issues: Whether the presence of insects alone makes food "insect-infested" within the meaning of Section 2(i)(f) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act.

Ratio Decidendi: The court interpreted the term "insect-infested" to mean the presence of a large number of insects in an article of food. The court also held that the Public Analyst's report was reliable even though he did not carry out the test for Uric acid because the prosecution based its case on the white grams being insect-infested, and it was not necessary for the public analyst to find out the extent of Uric acid present therein.

Final Decision: The court set aside the petitioner's conviction and sentence.

V. D. Misra, J.

( 1 ) THE revision is directed against the judgment of Addition Sessions Judge upholding the conviction of the petitioner under Section 7/16 Prevention of Food Adulteration Act ; and the sentence of six months rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1000. 00, in default, to undergo 4 months rigorous imprisonment. Ram Singh, Food Inspector, purchased a Sample of white chinas" (white grams) from the petitioner for analysis on April 25,1968. it was divided into three equal parts, put in three clean and dry jars and each jar was sent to the Public Analyst the same day, who declared the sample to be adulterated because of insect infestation Delhi Municipal Corporation filed a complaint against the petitioner under Section 7/16 Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) The Trial Magistrate found the petitoner guilty and convicted him and sentenced him as aforesaid. His appeal was dismissed by the additional Sessions Judge. Mr. Ghanshyam Das, learned counsel for the petitioner, contends that the report of the Public Analyst, Ex PE,is not reliable since he did not carry out the test for Uric acid as required by A is 6 of appendix B to the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955. He further contends that the report does not show that there was insect infestation* in terms of Section 2 (i) (f) of the Act. The repore of the Public Analyst is as under :-

the sample was in fit condition for analysis. Date of Analysis 27. 4. 1968. Insect infested chana grams-6. 9% Kala Chana:--- Contains living insects and am of the opinion that the same is adulterated as Chana grains are insect infested containing living insects

( 2 ). In order to appreciate the arguments of the learned counsel, the standard of quality laid down for Food Grains at A 18. 66 in Appendix B as well as Section 2 (i) (f) of the Act may be reproduced :-

a. 18. 06-Foodgrains meant for human consumption shall fulfil the following standard of quality, namely - (i) General : Grain shall be free from deleterious material and insecticide residues in excess of the prescribed permissible limits. (ii) Foreign matter. Which includdes sand, gravel dirt, stones, pebbles straw stems chaff, cockles, oilseeds and other nonpoisonous seeds, but excludes other foodgrains shall not exceed 4% by weight. (iii) Damaged grain-Grain that is damaged by fungus, moisture, or heating, and wherein the damage is not superficial but grain is affected internally, shall not exceed 5% by weight. (iv) Insect damage-The Uric acid content arising as a result of insect damage shall not exceed 20 milligrammes per 100 grammes sample of the grain, (v) Moisture content-The loss in weight due to moisture content shall not exceed 16% and shall be determined by accurately weighing about 2g. of well mixed sample in a dry, tarred dish (provided with cover) and drying the dish with contents in an oven at 100 C for 4 hours. Cool in a dessicator and weigh Repeat drying, cooling and weighing until the weight is constant. "

( 3 ). The relevant portion of Section 2 of the Act is in the following terms:-

"2. In this Act unless the context otherwise requires, (i) "adulterated" an article of food shall be deemed to be adulterated- (f) if the article consists wholly or in part of any filithy, putrid, disgasting rotten, decomposed, or diseased animal or vegetable sub" stance or is insect-infested or is otherwise unfit for human consumption ; (i) if the quality or purity of the article falls below the prescribed standard or its constituents are present in quantities which are in excess of the prescribed limits of variability ;"

( 4 ). During the course of arguments I decided to examine Shri Prem Parkash Bhatnagar, Public Analyst. It may be pointed out that he was not the Public Analyst who had sent the report Ex. P. E. which was given by his predecessor. He stated that insect infestation takes place first and thereafter the food grains are damaged by the insects. Once the food grains ha







Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top