LawMirror.com

Results of prevention of food adulteration act

Showing : 291-300 of 438 Results

KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2005
Details

Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, Section 2(ia)(m)(b), 16 -- Food article - Below prescribed standard but not injurious to health - Cannot be termed as adulterated - For conviction it must be established that the article or food item seized was subjected to chemical examination and should clearly disclose such an item is adulterated by mixing with any foreign..........

KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2005
Details

Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, Section 23, Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955, Rule 18 -- Sample - Sent to public analyst - It is mandatory that seal used has to be sent separately - Seal if not sent separately then it violates mandatory provision of Rule 18 which entitles accused for an acquittal...........

KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2005
Details

Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, Section 2(ia), 16 -- Nigerseed oil - Slight variation - Method of test not explained by public analyst - Report of public analyst cannot be relied upon - Conviction set aside...........

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2005
Details

Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, Section 7, 16 -- Sentence - Sample of 'Milk' found adulterated - Incident of the year 1981 - A period of 24 years has passed since the date of incident - A period of about 19 years has passed from the date of order of the appellate court - Accused has already undergone sentence of five months - Instead of ordering the accused..........

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2005
Details

Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, Section 7, 16, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 386, 401 -- Conviction - Appeal - Remand by lower appellate Court on ground that word 'insect infestation' not put in statement u/s 313 Cr.P.C. - Held, lower Appellate Court can remand case for hearing when either whole trial is illegal or non curable defect has occurred which..........

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2005
Details

Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, Section 16(1)(a)(i) -- Conviction u/s 16(1)(a) (i) of PFA - Accused sentenced to undergo RI for six months and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/- - Incident 20 years old - Sentence reduced to already undergone - Amount of fine enhanced to Rs.5,000/-...........

ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2005
Details

Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, Section 13(2), Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955, Rule 32(g)(i) -- 'Best use before six months' from date of packing - Does not mean that shelf life is six months - 'Best before' means that it is to be used before six months for its specific qualities...........

ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2005
Details

Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, Section 7(1), 16(c)(a)(i), Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955, Rule 53, 54, 55 -- Sample of sweetened carbonated beverages (Coca Cola, Limca etc.) - They have no shelf life - No preservative is required to be added in the sample...........

ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2005
Details

Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, Section 13(2) -- Sample - Found adulterated by Public Analyst - Accused has remedy to get second sample analysed by Central Food Laboratory - If accused does not avail the remedy then it cannot be held that accused suffered prejudice on account of delay in laying the prosecution...........

ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT

Year of decision: 2005
Details

Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, Section 13(2) -- Sample of sweetened carbonated beverages (Coca Cola etc.) - Prosecution launched after 23 months of taking sample - Request for sending second sample by Central Food Laboratory not availed on the ground that shelf life of carbonated water which was six months had already expired before launching prosecution -..........

Showing : 291-300 of 438 Results