Prevention of Food Adulteration Act

The landlord sought eviction of a shop tenant under Section 13(1)(c) of the Bombay Rent, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947, alleging that the tenant had been convicted of using the premises for illegal purposes. The tenant, who ran a sweet‑meats and farsan shop, had three convictions under the Prevention …

The State, represented by the Land Acquisition Officer and Mandal Revenue Officer, sought to acquire 7.35 acres of land and initially valued it at Rs 17,200 per acre. The District Court enhanced the valuation to Rs 65,762 per acre, and the Andhra Pradesh High Court further raised it to Rs 75,000 per acre, relying on ce…

Meet Singh was convicted under Section 161 of the IPC and Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 and sentenced to one year rigorous imprisonment on each count, to run concurrently, together with a fine. The Punjab & Haryana High Court, while upholding the conviction, reduced the imprisonment term to the…

The petitioners challenged a 2016 Maharashtra tender for supplying ready‑to‑cook food to Anganwadi centres, alleging that the tender’s conditions – mandatory use of extrusion technology, a turnover threshold of Rs 1 crore and requirement of automated production units – were arbitrary and excluded Mahila Mandals and sel…

Sharif Alimed was convicted under sections 7 and 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act for mixing a prohibited coal‑tar dye with powdered chillies. The Allahabad High Court reduced his sentence on the ground that the Public Analyst's report did not specifically state that the colour was injurious to human life.…

The Supreme Court examined the Municipal Corporation of Delhi's (MCD) scheme for granting squatting/tehbazari/vending rights to street vendors, including its provisions on site identification, allocation, and regulation. Petitioners sought a fresh, independent survey of hawking sites, a directive to give preference to …

Aladankandu Puthiyapurayil Abdulla filed a Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court challenging the delay in his trial for alleged food adulteration offences under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. The alleged incident occurred in 1972, but the trial was not conducted until 1977, causing prejudice to the …

The case concerned a senior judicial officer, R.R. Parekh, who was dismissed from service after two disciplinary inquiries found him guilty of misconduct for awarding sentences below the statutory minimum under Section 135 of the Customs Act, allegedly motivated by corrupt or oblique motives. The High Court had revisit…

The Supreme Court examined whether the committees constituted to refine the hawking‑zone scheme in Mumbai had exceeded the Court's earlier approval of 187 roads as hawking zones. It held that the committees acted within the Court's directions and their reduction of some roads did not deprive hawkers of their constituti…

Inderjeet filed a writ petition under Article 32 challenging the constitutionality of Section 7 read with Section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, which imposes absolute liability and a mandatory minimum six‑month imprisonment for anyone found guilty of selling adulterated food, irrespective of mens rea. …

The case concerned the regulation of street vendors (hawkers) in Mumbai and across India, where the petitioners sought relief from harassment and demanded implementation of the National Policy on Urban Street Vendors, 2009. The Supreme Court examined whether the earlier embargo on High Courts hearing hawker matters sho…

In 1975 a food inspector collected a 200‑gram sample of suji from the accused, although the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules required 250 g, and sent it to the public analyst, who reported excessive moisture and ash. The Metropolitan Magistrate acquitted the accused on the ground that the sample was insufficient i…

The respondents were convicted under s.16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act for selling confectionery drops containing cool‑tar dye. The Bombay High Court acquitted them on the ground that the sample sent to the public analyst was less than the 500 g minimum required by Rule 22, relying on the earlier…

The Municipal Corporation of Delhi filed a complaint under sections 7, 16 and 17 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act alleging that Hindustan Sugar Mills’ milk‑toffees were adulterated. Paragraph S of the complaint specifically named Ram Kishan Bajaj (Chairman), R.P. Neyatiya (Managing Director) and several direc…