The right to appeal under the Food Safety and Standards Act is rendered ineffectual if the food sample has expired by the time of analysis, violating Section 46(4), leading to the quashing of prosecution.

ORDER

Challenging the private complaint filed by the respondent/Food Safety Officer in C.C.No.1116 of 2023 on the file of the Metropolitan Magistrate IX, Saidapet, Chennai, for the offences under Sections 3(1)(zx), 3(1)(zz)(viii) & (xi), 26(1)(2)(i)(ii) & (v) & 27(1) of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act” for brevity) against A1 to A3; Sections 3(1)(zx), 3(1)(zz)(viii) & (xi), 26(1)(2)(i)(ii) & (v), 27(1) & 27(2)(c) of the Act against A4 & A5; Sections 3(1)(zx), 3(1)(zz)(viii) & (xi), 26(1)(2)(i)(ii) & (v) & 27(1) of the Act against A6 to A9, the seller/A2 has filed the present Criminal Original Petition.

2.It is the case of the complainant/Food Safety Officer that, on 24.12.2020, he inspected the retail store of M/s.Hita Life Ventures Private Limited at Adyar and on examination, he had a suspicion that the Aloe Vera Syrup manufactured by M/s.Annai Aravindh Herbals (A4 and A5) contained food additives and therefore, lifted samples of that syrup after following the procedure. Thereafter, the food sample was sent to the Food Analysis Laboratory at Thanjavur on 24.12.2020 and the same was received by the laboratory on 28.12.2020, and the other samples were sent to the Designated Officer. The Food Analyst sent a report on 28.10.2021 with a finding that the product contained “benzoic acid” higher than the permitted level, as a result of which, the product was declared as substandard and unsafe. The Designated Officer informed the accused persons that the food was found substandard and unsafe by letter dated 15.11.2021 and also informed of the right to file an appeal as against the report of the Food Analysis Laboratory, Thanjavur. Thereafter, after obtaining sanction, the complainant filed the present private complaint as against the retail seller, viz., M/s.Hita Life Ventures Private Limited (A1 to A3), marketing agent, viz., M/s.Annai Aravindh Herbals (A4 & A5) and the manufacturer of the product, viz., M/s.Annai Foods (A6 to A9) for the offences as stated supra. The complaint was taken on file by the learned IX Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai, in C.C.No.1116 of 2023, challenging which, the Managing Director of the retail seller, viz., M/s.Hita Life Ventures Private Limited, who is arrayed as A2, has filed the present Criminal Original Petition.

3.According to the petitioner (A2), he is the owner and Managing Director of the retail store, namely, M/s.Hita Life Ventures Private Limited. It is his contention that A1 was working as Manager of the store when the samples were taken and A1 was only responsible for the operations and day-to-day affairs of the retail store at Adyar, and the Aloe Vera Syrup is manufactured by A4 to A9. Therefore, the petitioner (A2) nor his company (A3) has any role in the manufacturing of the Aloe Vera Syrup. The role of the petitioner and his company is limited only to selling of the products which were manufactured by A4 to A9. According to the petitioner, the product was manufactured in October, 2020 and the packaging also shows the expiry details. It should be used before 12 months from the date of manufacturing. It is the contention of the petitioner that, in the present case, the product was manufactured in October, 2020 and the samples were taken on 24.12.2020 and the same were received by the laboratory on 28.12.2020. However, the sample was not analysed within a period of 14 days. The report of the Foo