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

1980 Supreme(All) 330

SATISH CHANDRA, H. N. SETH
KHEDAN LAL AND SONS – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH – Respondent


H. N. SETH, J.

( 1 ) THESE four petitions under Artcle 226 of the Constitution, raise a common question of law, arising in similar circumstance, and they can conveniently be dealt with and disposed of by a common judgment.

( 2 ) M/s. Khedan Lal and Sons, Varahasi (petitioner in writ petition Nos, 4613, 6792, 316) is a partnership firm. It manufactures, sells, stores, supplies and distributes Zarda (chewing. tobacco)through various dealers in the State. Outside dealers also place orders for the supply of tobacco manufactured by the firm. Sri Nand Kishore proprietor of Agra Sughandhi Bhandar, Agra (petitioner in writ petition No. 3930) Bhagwan Das and Sons, Narhi, Lucknow, Hanuman Pd. , narhi Lucknow, Rajendra Pd. , of Rana Bazar Baragaon Gonda, are some of the persons who deal in tobacco manufactured by M/s. Khedan Lal and Sons. In the months of January and April, 1975, various Food Inspectors obtained from the aforesaid dealers, samples of tobacco manufactured by M/s. Khedan Lal and Sons which, on analysis, were found to contain colouring material, use of which is prohibited by the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. Consequently, the petitioners are being prosecuted in various cr













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
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top