PANDRANG ROW
Pandrang Row, J.
1. The petitioner has been convicted of an offence punishable under Section 5, Clause 1(d) of the Madras Prevention of Adulteration Act III of 1918 and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 100. The petitioner is the proprietor of a Coffee Hotel at Vellore and the prosecution relates to a certain sweetmeat called kajoor which was prepared and sold at the hotel by the petitioner through his servants. The sample that was analysed was found to contain 80 per cent, of fat not derived from milk or cream. The prosecution assumed and the Magistrate seems to have acted on the same assumption that merely because the sweetmeat was found to contain 80 per cent, of fat not derived from milk or cream it amounts to adulteration which is prohibited by the Act. The particular sweetmeat in question is not one of the articles of food in respect of which the Government have prescribed standards of purity or determined the normal constituents thereof, and it cannot be said that there is any room afforded for raising a presumption that the article of food is not genuine or is injurious. It is conceded by the learned Public Prosecutor that no such action has been taken by the Local Governm
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.