Delays in food sample analysis and prosecution were upheld as lawful due to valid administrative delays and extensions provided under the Food Safety and Standards Act.

O R D E R

This criminal original petition has been filed seeking quashment of the case in STC No.64 of 2023 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Palani.

2.The facts in brief:-

The petitioners company called 'KSE Limited', Dairy Division engaged in manufacturer of creams situated at Thalayuthu Village, Palani Taluk, Dindigul District. On 17/08/2021 at about 01.00 pm, the complainant inspected the Firm, took out a sample by purchase of 2 kgs of TUTTY FRUITY (Loose Condition), which was used to prepare ice cream. Proper notice was issued to the accused. A request was made to the accused by informing him about their right to get the sample tested by The National Accreditation Board for Testing and Calibration Laboratory (in short 'NABL'). But the accused waived the choice. So the sample was taken as per the procedure, handed over to the Designated Officer. It was analyzed by the Government Analyst, Palayamkottai, by report, dated 23/02/2022, it was informed that it is unsafe. Copy of the report was given to the accused, on 07/03/2022. They were also informed about their right of appeal as provided under section 46(4) of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006. The Designated Officer, after going through the entire records, satisfied that it is a fit case for initiating criminal proceedings. So sanction was accorded, on 01/12/2022. The Commissioner of Food Safety also approved the prosecution under section 77 of the Food Safety and Standard Act, 2006. So, the complaint was filed by the respondent herein before the trial court namely the Judicial Magistrate, Palani. It was taken cognizance in STC No.64 of 2023.

3.Pending trial process, this petition is filed by the petitioners seeking quashment of the same on the following grounds:-

There is a violation of section 42(2) of the Food Safety and Standard Act, 2006 and within 14 days from the date of receipt of the sample, analysis ought to have been undertaken. Here there is a violation.

4.The next ground is that as per section 77 of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, the time limit for launching the prosecution is one year from the date of the commission of the offence, but the complaint was filed much after that period. So the cognizance taken by the trial court itself is illegal.

5.Heard both sides.

6.Only technical point is involved in this matter.

The other facts that the petitioners are running a Company called “KSE Limited', Dairy Division', which involved in diary business, producing ice cream; The Tutty Fruity was purchased by the respondent herein for taking out analysis. There is no dispute by the petitioners herein.

7.With regard to sampling and process conducted by the respondent as per the procedures are all not denied and disputed by the petitioners. With regard to the sampling and sending of the same to the analyst, there is clear material. But the problem lies in time taken by the Food Analyst in making the report.

8.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would straightaway brought to the notice of this court, the provision 42(2) of the Food Safety and Standards Axt, 2006, which reads as under:-

“42.Procedure for launching prosecution.–

(1)......

(2)The Food Analyst after receiving the sample from the Food Safety Officer shall analyse the sample and send the analysis report mentioning method of sampling and analysis within fourteen days to Designated Officer with a copy to Commissioner of Food Safety.

(3)..... (4)..... (5).....

9.Per contra, the prosecution relied upon section

46(3) of the Food Safety and Standards Act, which reads as under:-

46.Functions of Food Analyst.–

(1).... (2)....

(3)The Food Analyst shall, within a period of fourteen days from the date of receipt of any sample for analysis, send;

(i)where such sample is received under section 38 or section 47, to the Designated Officer, four copies of the report indicating the method of sampling and analysis; and (ii)where such sample is received under section 40, a copy of the report indicating the method of s