ORDER

This petition is filed to quash the proceedings in S.T.C. No. 7624 of

2021, on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.VI, Madurai.

2.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that on

07.07.2022, the complainant seized the Amudham Brand Lighting Oil weighing 370 Kilo Litre and Amudham Oil weighing 110Kilo Litre from the petitioner's shop and sent the same to the Food Analyst on 08.07.2020. The Food Analyst sent a report on 10.09.2020 stating that the sample is misleading, misbranded, sub standard, unsafe, prohibited and restricted on sales. Then, the Designated Officer sent the said report along with his letter dated 18.09.2020, i.e., after the expiry of the said product, to the Commissioner of Food Safety. Therefore, the petitioner's right to appeal is barred. After getting sanction from the Commissioner of Food Safety, the complainant filed a complaint against the petitioner for the offences under Sections 51, 52(1), 53(1)(a), 59(i) and 63 of Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006. He further submitted that the lighting oil will not come under definition of food, as per Section 3(J) explanation of Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006. Therefore, the prosecution is unsustainable and liable to be quashed.

3.Today, the Food Safety Officer is present before this Court. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent, on instructions submitted that the respondent has seized only a lighting oil not edible oil.

4. I have considered the rival submission of both the learned counsel appearing on side and perused the materials available on records.

5.A perusal of records shows that the petitioner is an accused in S.T.C.No.7624 of 2021 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.VI, Madurai. He was prosecuted by the respondent for the offence under Sections 51, 52(1), 53(1)(a), 59(i) and 63 of Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 based on the analyst report, dated 10.09.2020. Further fact reveals that the seized oil is not the edible oil and it is only lighting oil. In this connection, it is to be noted that the definition of food as stated in Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 and Section 3(J) of Food Safety and Standards Act 2006 reads as follows:-

''(j) "food" means any substance, whether processed, partially processed or unprocessed, which is intended for human consumption and includes primary food, to the extent defined in clause (ZK) genetically modified or engineered food or food containing such ingredients, infant food, packaged drinking water, alcoholic drink, chewing gum, and any substance, including water used into the food during its manufacture, preparation or treatment but does not include any animal feed, live animals unless they are prepared or processed for placing on the market for human consumption, plants prior to harvesting, drugs and medicinal products, cosmetics, narcotic or psychotropic substances: Provided that the Central Government may declare, by notification in the Official Gazette, any other article as food for the purposes of this Act having regards to its use, nature, substance or quality;

6. Further, the Commissioner of Food Safety has issued a circular on

17.12.2014, pertaining to lifting of oil samples and directed that the lighting oil is not edible use, it is not covered under Food Safety and Standards Act. Instead of the directions, the respondent lifting the lighting oil to Food Analysts and prosecuted. Hence, lighting oil is not a food as definition of the Food Safety and Standards Act 2006 and not for human consumption prosecution will not lie. It is not disputed that the samples of lifting from the petitioner's business is not edible oil and it is only lighting oil. Therefore, the prosecution against this petitioner in S.T.C.No.7624 of 2021 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.VI, Madurai is unsustainable and liable to be quashed.

7. Accordingly, the proceedings in S.T.C.No.7624 of 2021 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.V