Showing : 51-60 of 137 Results

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2005
Details
Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, Section 7, 16, 20-- Ice candy - Analysis of sample - First analysis by Public Analyst - On request of accused sample sent for analysis to Central Food Laboratory - At the time of second analysis, sample getting fermented and no longer fit for analysis - Accused acquitted...........
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2005
Details
Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, Section 20-- Sanction for prosecution - Filling up blanks of proforma - Shows complete non application of mind - While granting sanction for prosecution sanctioning authority is required to thoroughly examine the matter as to committing an offence and that it is in the public interest to accord sanction -..........
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Year of decision: 2005
Details
Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, Section 16(1)(a)(ii)-- Offence under Prevention of Food Adulteration Act - Conviction - High Court acquitted accused in appeal as prosecution not able to make out a case - No reason to interfere with order of acquittal...........
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2005
Details
Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, Section 7, 14-- Adulterated 'Cloves' - Accused producing Bill/Cash Memo of manufacturer - It is a legal and valid warranty which cannot be disbelieved - Conviction and sentence unsustainable...........
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2005
Details
Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, Section 4, Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, Section 16(1)(a)(i)-- Conviction under Food Adulteration Act - Accused faced trial for 19 years - Accused released on Probation though minimum sentence is provided under the Act...........
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2005
Details
Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, Section 16(1)(a)(i)-- Catechu (betal-nut) - Sample found adulterated - Not mentioned in Panchnama that the seized substance was catechu (edible) - It cannot be said that seized substance was selling for edible purposes - Accused acquitted...........
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2005
Details
Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, Section 13(2)-- Catechu (betal-nut) - Provision of S.13(2) of the Act not complied with - Ex.P16 sent by registered post but original postal receipt not produced and photo copy proved without permission of Court u/s 65 of Evidence Act - Without proof of original document such evidence is not reliable - Accused..........
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2004
Details
Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, Section S.13(2), Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1995, Rule 9A-- Sample - Found to be adulterated - Report of Public Analyst sent to accused prior to institution of complaint in Court whereas Rule 9A requires that report of Public Analyst be sent to accused after institution of complaint in Court - Rule 9A is directory - No prejudice caused to accused -..........
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2004
Details
Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, Section 13(2), Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1995, Rule 9A-- Sample - Found to be adulterated - Delay in sending report of Public Analyst or delay in filing complaint in Court - It is irregularity - Accused not entitled to acquittal...........
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Year of decision: 2004
Details
Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, Section 13(2)-- Second analysis - In absence of an application by accused for second analysis of sample by Director, accused cannot complain that he was deprived of his right to have the second sample analysed by the Director - Mere delay and laches on the part of the complainant in getting the summons served was..........

Showing : 51-60 of 137 Results