IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE AMAR NATH (KESHARWANI)

rd HEARD ON THE 3 OF SEPTEMBER, 2022 PASSED ON THE 14th OF OCTOBER,2022 SECOND APPEAL No. 652 of 2021 BETWEEN:-

JAYANTILAL S/O ACHALCHAND JAIN, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, 1. OCCUPATION: BUSINESS 167, VINDHYACHAL NAGAR, INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

RAJESH KUMAR S/O ACHAL CHAND JAIN, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, 2. OCCUPATION: VYAPAR 28, RAMCHANDRA NAGAR MAIN AIRODROME ROAD INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....APPELLANT (SHRI VINAYAK BALCHANDANI,ADVOCATE)

AND SHRI SANJEEV KUMAR MISHRA FOOD SAFETY OFFICER S/O NOT MENTION OCCUPATION: FOOD SAFETY OFFICER FOOD AND DRUGS ADMINISTRATION, DIST. DHAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....RESPONDENTS (SHRI HITENDRA TRIPATHI, GOVT.ADVOCATE)

This appeal coming on for order this day, Shri Hon'ble Amarnath (Kesharwani) passed the following:

ORDER

This order will decide the objection raised by the Office regarding the maintainability of the second appeal in the light of order passed by the Gwalior Bench in S.A.No.58/2017 and CRA.No.1131/2018.

2. Penalty has been imposed on the appellants by the Adjudicating Officer/Additional District Magistrate, Dhar vide order dated 13/01/2020 in case No.31/2016/Misc.Offence/ R.C.M.S. No.31/Misc./2016 under Section 26(2)(ii) read with Section 27(1) read with Section 52 of "The Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006" (hereinafter to be referred to as “Act of 2006”) for storing misbranded chilli powder for sale. Aggrieved by the order of Adjudicating Authority, the appellants have filed the appeal under Section 70 of the "Act of 2006" before the "Food Safety Appellate Tribunal". Being aggrieved by the order dated 06/11/2020 passed by the Court of District Judge/Presiding Judge, Food Safety Appellate Tribunal, District Dhar in MCA.No.23/2020, this appeal has been filed under Section 71(6) of the "Act of 2006" before this Court as "Second Appeal"

on which the Office has raised objection.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that for breach of section 26(2)(ii) and Section 27(1) of the "Act of 2006" fine amount of Rs.50,000/- was imposed on each of the appellants under Section 52 of the "Act of 2006" and tried by the Additional District Magistrate/Adjudicating Authority under Section 68 of the "Act of 2006" and aggrieved by the order of Adjudicating Authority, the appellants have filed the appeal under Section 70 of the “Act of 2006” before the "Food Safety Appellate Tribunal" and being aggrieved by the order dated 06/11/2020 passed by the Court of District Judge/Presiding Judge, Food Safety Appellate Tribunal, District Dhar in MCA.No.23/2020, this appeal is rightly filed under Section 71(6) of the "Act of 2006" before this Court and registered as Civil Appeal and submits that objection raised by the office is liable to be rejected. Learned counsel for the appellants has placed reliance on the citation Pradeep Kumar Gupta Vs. State of U.P (2016 (2) FAC 93)

passed by the Allahabad High Court in support of his arguments.

4. Learned Govt. Advocate for the respondent State submitted that appeal is wrongly filed and registered as "Second Appeal" because no decree has been passed by the Court below and submits that the appeal may be registered and adjudicated as criminal appeal.

5. As per Section 71(6) of the "Act of 2006" appeal is maintainable before this Court against the order passed under Section 70 of the "Act of 2006" by the Food Safety Appellate Tribunal. Therefore, maintainability of appeal against the order passed by the Food Safety Appellate Tribunal under Section 70 of the "Act of 2006" before this Court is not in dispute. The core issue which falls for consideration before this Court is as to the nature of adjudication proceedings contemplated under Chapter X of the "Act of 2006" , whether such proceedings are civil or criminal in nature.

6. In citation of Pradeep Kumar Gupta(supra), para 24, single judge of the Allahabad High Court has dealt in the same matter and after consideration it was held that- “The app