Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, Section 16(1A)(i) -- Arhar dal - Sample found to be adulterated - Accused convicted and sentenced to 9 months RI - Offence 10 years old - Sentence reduced to already undergone...........
Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, Section 7, 16 -- Salt - Sample not containing required quantity of Iodine - First accused Naresh Kumar relied on invoice issued by appellant - Invoice issued in the name of one Darshan Lal - No evidence as to who is Darshan Lal - In the bill it is not specifically stated that salt is sold in packed condition - Only the weight of..........
Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, Section 16(1)(a)(i) -- Milk - Contained fat more than required standard but there was small deficiency in milk solids not fat - Accused undergoing agony of trial for 20 years - It is sufficient punishment - Accused acquitted...........
Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, Section 16(1)(a)(i) -- Milk - Sample found to be adulterated - Complaint did not state that milk was shaken up clock-wise and anti clock-wise to make it homogeneous - This lacuna cannot be filled up by Food Inspector during his examination - Acquittal upheld...........
Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, Section 16(1)(a)(i) -- Boiled milk - Sample taken by mixing milk with cup - Fat which came on the top of boiled milk cannot be remixed with a cup - Acquittal upheld...........
Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, Section 16(1)(a), 2(ia)(f) -- Independent witness with regard to taking of sample not examined - Accused acquitted...........
Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, Section 16(1)(a), 2(ia)(f) -- Saunf - Sample found to be contain three rodent excreta - Sample found to be adulterated as in case of Saunf, rodent excreta is not permissible to any extent - In such a case it is not necessary to prove further that article of food was unfit for human consumption...........
Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, Section 16A -- Sample of food article found to be adulterated - Magistrate followed procedure meant for warrant case without first following procedure of summary trial - Procedure followed by Magistrate contrary to mandatory provision of S.16-A - Accused cannot be convicted...........
Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, Section 16(1)(a)(i) -- Chana Dal - Sample contained some grains of Kesri Dal - Report of Central Food Laboratory that sample is substandard - Accused running Karyana shop and selling different Dals (Pulses) - If some grains of Kesri Dal mix in Chana Dal it cannot be said that accused had mixed Kesri Dal in Chana Dal to earn more..........
Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, Section 16(1)(a)(i) -- Tea leaves - Sample found to be adulterated - Public Analyst have not opined that substance was unfit for human consumption - Acquittal upheld...........
