Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954

Vijendra was charged under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 for selling adulterated buffalo milk. A food inspector took a milk sample in the presence of a public witness, sent it to the public analyst, and the analyst’s report indicated adulteration. The report was dispatched to Vijendra by registered post…

Girishbhai Dahyabhai Shah was prosecuted under Section 16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 for allegedly selling adulterated curd. The sample was taken on 8 April 1988 and the Public Analyst’s report indicating adulteration was filed on 4 May 1988 but was only served to the accused on 17 July 1…

The State of Uttar Pradesh convicted Hanif under sections 7 and 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 for selling adulterated milk, sentencing him to six months' rigorous imprisonment and a fine. The conviction was affirmed by the Sessions Court but set aside by the Allahabad High Court on the ground that…

Ganeshlal Jashraj was charged under section 16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 for selling adulterated turmeric powder to a food inspector. He pleaded not guilty, but after the prosecution evidence closed he was examined under section 313 of the CrPC and, via plea‑bargaining, submitted an appl…

The State of Maharashtra appealed an acquittal of Pandurang and others under Sections 7(1), 16 and 17 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954. The appeal, which involved an offence punishable with imprisonment exceeding two years, was required by the Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960 to be heard by …

The State of Gujarat prosecuted Shaileshbhai Mansukhlal Shah and another under Sections 7(i) and (v) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954. The accused, dissatisfied with the public analyst's report, invoked Section 13(2) to obtain a second analysis of the food sample by the Central Food Laboratory. The tria…

The appellant sold ice‑sticks that were examined by a public analyst who reported the presence of saccharin and dulcin, the latter being an adulterant declared injurious to health. A subsequent analysis by the Central Food Laboratory found only saccharin and no dulcin. The trial court convicted the appellant under Sect…

Alkem Laboratories Ltd, the marketer of a "sugarless" jelly manufactured by another company, was implicated after a food inspector seized samples from a retailer and a public analyst found sugar, constituting misbranding. The retailer later moved an application under Section 20A of the Prevention of Food Adulteration A…

The appellants, A.K. Roy and others, were charged under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 after a Food Inspector from Faridkot filed a complaint alleging adulteration of noodles. The Inspector claimed authority to prosecute based on a delegation of power from the State Government to the Food (Health) Author…

The respondent, Manohar Lal, was convicted under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 and sentenced to one year of simple imprisonment plus a fine. The trial court and the First Appellate Court upheld the conviction and sentence, holding that the power to commute under Section 433(d) of the Code of Criminal Pr…

Jagdish Prasad was convicted under Sections 7 and 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 and sentenced by the trial court to six months' rigorous imprisonment, the minimum punishment prescribed. The Rajasthan High Court commuted the sentence to a fine of Rs.6,000 and directed the appropriate Government to …

The State of Gujarat filed complaints alleging that respondents had stored and sold food articles adulterated with saccharin, violating Sections 7(1), 7(5) and 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954. The respondents moved the Gujarat High Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to q…

The appellant, a kirana shopkeeper in Madhya Pradesh, was prosecuted under Sections 7(1) and 16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 for allegedly selling adulterated besan that contained kesari dal. The trial court acquitted him, holding that the ash content was within permissible limits and the m…

Mis Parakh Foods Ltd., the manufacturer of "Shaktimaan Refined Soyabean Oil", was prosecuted for alleged misbranding under Rule 37 D of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955 after a public analyst claimed that the label’s pictures of various vegetables exaggerated the quality of the oil. The High Court held t…

The State of Maharashtra prosecuted Baburao Ravaji Mharulkar and others for selling ice cream that contained only 5.95% milk fat, below the 10% minimum prescribed by Paragraph A.11.02.08 of Appendix B to the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955. The trial court acquitted the respondents, holding that the rule wa…

The appellant, a shopkeeper, was found guilty of selling adulterated chilli powder and convicted under Section 7 read with Section 16(1) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, receiving six months' simple imprisonment and a Rs.1,000 fine. The conviction and sentence were upheld by the Sessions Court and the …

The Delhi Administration prosecuted Puranmal for alleged adulteration of jal mirchi powder under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 after a public analyst reported nine live meal worms in a sample taken from his shop. The trial court held that the prosecution had not proved the powder was adulterated and acq…

The petitioner, a Junior Scientific Officer in the Andhra Pradesh Institute of Preventive Medicine Service, claimed he met the qualifications for promotion to Senior Scientific Officer but was denied because Rule 4(b) of the service's ad‑hoc rules required a minimum of five years of post‑graduate experience in food ana…

A food inspector seized a sample of kutcha khoya from the appellant’s sweet‑meat shop, divided it into three parts and sent one to the public analyst (who found adulteration) and two to the local health authority. The appellant invoked his right under s.13(2) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act to have a part ex…

The Delhi Administration appealed the acquittal of Vidya Gupta, a sweet shop vendor, who was charged under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 for storing adulterated ghee used to make jalebis. The Supreme Court held that Section 7, read with its explanation, deems any person who stores adulterated food for t…

The State of Delhi filed a complaint under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 alleging that groundnut oil sold by Ahmed Oomer Bhoy's Delhi branch was adulterated. The complaint named the manufacturers, distributors, retailer, the person nominated under s.17(2) as responsible, and the two sales managers of th…

Thana Singh, an undertrial accused of an offence under the NDPS Act, had been detained for over twelve years without trial despite repeated bail refusals. The Supreme Court examined whether such prolonged detention violated the right to speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution. Relying on earlier decisions tha…

The Supreme Court examined whether the addition of saccharin, an artificial sweetener, to supari (pan masala) violated the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955. The appellants were convicted under sections 7(i) and 16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act for selling adulterated supari containing s…

The Centre for Public Interest Litigation filed a writ petition seeking a separate expert committee to examine the health effects of soft drinks, especially on children, and to compel the Union of India to impose stricter regulatory controls, labeling, and advertising standards. The Court examined whether the existing …

The appellants, a father and son, were convicted for selling adulterated "Chhena Mithai". The Public Analyst reported adulteration with starch, and the Central Food Laboratory confirmed adulteration but did not specify starch. The trial court and first appellate court convicted them under Section 16(1)(a)(i) of the Pre…

The petitioners, Ram Nath and others, challenged prosecutions under Sections 272 and 273 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for alleged adulteration and sale of noxious food, arguing that the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 (FSSA) had an overriding effect. The State of Uttar Pradesh contended that simultaneous prosecut…

The appellant, a milk vendor, had a sample of his milk taken by a food inspector on 19 March 1983, which was sent for analysis and reported as adulterated. He was convicted under Section 7 read with Section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, sentenced to six months imprisonment and a fine, later reduc…

Amrutlal Chunilal Raval was elected President of the Bhor Municipal Council in 1974, but a prior conviction on 26 December 1973 under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act rendered him disqualified under Section 16(1)(a) of the Maharashtra Municipalities Act, 1965, which imposes a five‑year bar unless the State Gover…

The Food Corporation of India (FCI) had a stock of sub‑standard rice and issued a tender inviting licensed dealers to purchase it on the condition that they would upgrade the rice before it entered the market for human consumption. Two licensed dealers challenged the tender, alleging it violated the West Bengal Rice an…

The State of Delhi appealed the acquittal of Dharampal, who had been convicted under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act for selling adulterated "lal mirch kutti". The Sessions Judge had set aside the conviction on the ground that the contents of the Central Food Laboratory certificate were not read out to the accu…

The appellant, a Mahila cooperative society, challenged the award of a contract for supplying fortified blended food under the Integrated Child Development Scheme, arguing that the eligibility criteria in the Expression of Interest (EOI) were arbitrary and that the contract period should be limited to one year. The Hig…

The Food Inspector purchased a sample of toor dal and, after a Public Analyst reported it adulterated with kesari dal, filed a complaint under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. The respondent challenged the prosecution, arguing that a fresh sanction under Section 20 was required when a later certificate from the…

Pepsico India Holdings Pvt. Ltd., the manufacturer of sweetened carbonated water, was prosecuted after a public analyst reported the presence of the pesticide carbofuran (0.001 mg/L) in its product, alleging adulteration under Rule 65 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955 and Section 2(ia)(h) of the Preven…

The appellants, three brothers running a shop, were prosecuted under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 for selling tea dust that was found adulterated by the Public Analyst. The trial magistrate acquitted them, holding that the Public Analyst had not sent the report within 45 days as required by Rule 7(3) a…

Murlidhar Shyamlal, a vendor, was charged under Section 7 read with Section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 for selling adulterated mustard oil. The trial court acquitted him, but the Assam High Court convicted him, relying on the absence of a proper warranty. The vendor argued that Section 19(2) of…

The Andhra Pradesh Prohibition & Excise Superintendent raided toddy shops of the Toddy Tappers Cooperative Society and found adulterated toddy containing alprazolam. Licences were suspended after samples were sent to independent laboratories under an amended Rule 24 of the A.P. Excise (Arrack and Toddy Licenses General…

Mohd. Yaseen was convicted under Sections 7 and 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 and sentenced to one year of rigorous imprisonment. His appeal was dismissed and a revision petition before the Allahabad High Court was also rejected. He filed a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Proced…

The State of Punjab prosecuted Nohar Chand, a fertilizer manufacturer in Ludhiana, for producing sub‑standard fertilizer that was marketed through his agent, Sachdeva Enterprises, in Kapurthala. A sample taken from the agent’s premises was found sub‑standard, leading to a criminal complaint under the Essential Commodit…

The appellant, M/s Sri Mahavir Agency, a vendor, bought packaged pan‑masala (Pan Parag) from the manufacturer M/s Kothari Pouches Ltd. and sold it to customers. Samples seized from a buyer’s premises were tested and found to be below the standards prescribed under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, leading …

The appellant, a small‑time tradesman, was convicted under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 for selling "Kesari coloured sweet supari sali" adulterated with a yellow basic coal‑tar dye. He argued that "supari" (betel nut) should be treated as a "fruit‑product" or a "flavouring agent" under Rules 23, 28 and…

The State of Himachal Pradesh prosecuted Narendra Kumar (accused No.1) and a vendor (accused No.2) under Section 16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act for selling adulterated sugar. A food inspector sealed a sample and sent it, along with a memorandum and seal impression, to a public analyst. The analy…

The State of Tamil Nadu appealed the acquittal of R. Krishnamurthy, who had sold gingelly oil adulterated with 15% groundnut oil and claimed it was for external use only. The trial court convicted him under section 16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, but the Sessions Judge and High Court acqui…

The prosecution alleged that a batch of Tata iodized salt sold by the appellant, Mohinder Kumar, was deficient in iodine, violating the Food Adulteration Act. The first accused, Naresh Kumar, purchased five packets, which were tested and found to contain only 5 ppm iodine instead of the required 15 ppm, and he claimed …

The appellant, a director of Bharti Retail, was charged with misbranding food products on 29 November 2010 under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (PFA). Although the PFA was still in force, the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 (FSSA) – including its penalty provision (Section 52) and overriding clause (…

The Food Inspector of the Baroda Municipal Corporation purchased curd from the respondents' shop and sent samples for analysis, which showed marginal adulteration. The trial court convicted the respondents under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, but the Sessions Judge acquitted them on the ground that the …

The respondent, K. Rajeshwar Rao, sold cumin that was found to be adulterated on 13 March 1976. He was charged under Section 16(1)(a)(i) read with Section 7(1) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954. The trial court and the High Court acquitted him on the ground that his father owned the shop and that the san…

The appellants were convicted under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (PoFA) for selling adulterated curd and various food items, receiving six months' imprisonment and fines. They sought release on probation under the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, arguing that Section 20AA of PoFA, which excluded probation, …

Dayal Singh was convicted under Sections 7 and 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 for selling hard‑boiled sugar confectionery that contained mineral oil, which at the time was deemed an unwholesome ingredient and amounted to adulteration. While his appeal was pending, the Rules were amended to permit m…

A food inspector seized samples of orange drink and vanaspati ghee from the godowns of Lipton India Ltd and Hindustan Lever Ltd and, after a public analyst’s report, found them adulterated and mis‑branded. Complaints were filed under sections 7 and 16 read with section 17 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 195…

The accused were charged under Section 16(1)(a)(i) read with Section 7 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 for adulterating turmeric powder. After the prosecution presented some evidence, a plea‑bargaining arrangement was reached among the prosecution, the defence and the magistrate, leading the accused to…

The Calcutta Municipal Corporation filed a special leave petition challenging the High Court’s order that quashed prosecution of Pawan K. Saraf for alleged adulteration of compounded asafoetida under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954. The trial court had relied on a Public Analyst’s report finding the sampl…

The appellant, Delhi Cloth and General Mills Co. Ltd., was the manufacturer of vanaspati ghee that was found adulterated when sold by Laxmi Narain, who was prosecuted under Section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954. During the trial, the magistrate, on the basis of evidence that the appellant had manu…

Hindustan Unilever Ltd. and five others were charged under Section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration (PFA) Act for allegedly selling adulterated Kesar Pista ice‑cream. The Public Analyst’s report declared the sample adulterated, but one co‑accused invoked the right under Section 13(2) of the PFA Act to have a s…

The State of Rajasthan appealed against a Rajasthan High Court order that directed the State Government to fill 34 vacant Food Inspector posts and to replace medical officers with sanitary inspectors for enforcing the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. The High Court had held that medical officers, though not trained…

The Municipal Corporation of Delhi appealed the acquittal of Tek Chand Bhatia, a wholesale dealer in cashew nuts, who was charged under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 for selling insect‑infested nuts. Samples taken from his shop were found to be infested by more than 20% insects. The Supreme Court examin…

A Food Inspector entered the appellant's grocery shop and demanded a sample of dhania for analysis. The appellant left the shop under the pretext of passing urine and did not return for about one and a half hours, after which the inspector took the sample in his absence. The appellant was charged under Section 16(1)(c)…

The appellant, Hari Shankar Aggarwal, was named as a nominee in a complaint under Sections 7 and 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, based on information from the Commercial Tax Department, while the Local Health Officer had identified Devendra Singh Bhadauria as the director of the firm. Aggarwal cont…

The Supreme Court examined the long‑standing dispute over the regulation of street hawkers in Mumbai, arising from a draft scheme prepared by the Bombay Municipal Corporation that sought to designate hawking and non‑hawking zones and to regulate licences. The Court affirmed that hawkers enjoy the constitutional right t…

S.S. Dhanoa, an IAS officer, was deputed as General Manager of the Super Bazaars run by the Cooperative Store Ltd., a society registered under the Bombay Cooperative Societies Act. He was charged under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act for selling adulterated honey and argued that he was a public servant under cl…

The appellant, a food manufacturer, was charged under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act after a complaint by the Local Health Authority and was acquitted by a Metropolitan Magistrate. The State sought to appeal the acquittal in the Sessions Court under Section 378(1)(a) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, wh…

The appellant, a food inspector, charged the respondents with adulterating food under s.16(1)(a) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 as it stood in West Bengal after the 1973 State amendment, which prescribed life imprisonment and made the offence triable only by a Sessions Court. While the case was pendin…

The Food Inspector purchased a bottle of synthetic syrup (sarbath) from the shop of Benny Thomas and sent the sample for analysis, which showed it to be adulterated. Thomas was convicted under Section 16(1)(a)(i) read with Sections 7(1) and 2(ia)(m) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 and relevant Rules. O…

The Supreme Court examined criminal prosecutions under Sections 7 and 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 against manufacturers of pan masala and mouth freshener whose products contained saccharin at 2000 ppm and 2450 ppm, exceeding the limits prescribed by Rule 47 of the 1955 Food Adulteration Rules. T…

The State of Punjab filed criminal proceedings under Section 7(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 against a vendor, a dealer and a manufacturer of vanaspati after a food inspector took a 1.5 kg sample by opening one sealed tin of 16.5 kg and found the product adulterated. The Punjab & Haryana High Cour…

The appellants were convicted under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 for misbranding sugar‑boiled confectionery because the packages lacked the manufacturer’s address and date of manufacture. The conviction was upheld by the trial court, the district court and the Calcutta High Court, although the High Cou…

The Delhi High Court, in a public‑interest writ, ordered manufacturers of drugs and cosmetics (other than life‑saving drugs) to display symbols indicating whether the product contained vegetarian or non‑vegetarian ingredients. The petitioners challenged this order, arguing that the Drugs and Cosmetics Act and Rules do …

The appellant was convicted under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 for adulterating a small quantity of red chilli. The trial magistrate conducted the case as a warrant case, although Section 16‑A of the Act provides for a summary trial of such offences. The appellant argued that the summary‑trial provisio…

A complaint was lodged in 1989 alleging adulteration of Dalda Vanaspati Ghee manufactured by Hindustan Unilever Limited (HUL). The trial magistrate initially absolved the company’s directors and continued prosecution against the nominated officer, Nirmal Sen, who was later convicted under the Prevention of Food Adulter…

Om Prakash was convicted under Section 7(1) read with Section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 for selling 'Khoya' whose milk‑fat content was 19.07% instead of the prescribed minimum of 20%. The trial court sentenced him to six months' imprisonment and a fine of Rs 2,000. After the conviction was uph…

The appellant, Ranajoy Bose, was charged under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 for selling adulterated tea leaves. The prosecution was launched after obtaining consent from the District Health Officer (IV) under Section 20(1) of the Act, as per a state notification. The appellant challenged the validity o…

The consumer complained that a bottle of "Lehar Pepsi" he purchased was adulterated with fungus, leading to a complaint under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954. The Special Judicial Magistrate summoned Pepsi Foods Ltd. and others, but the appellants challenged the summons in the High Court, which dismissed …

The appellant was convicted under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 for selling milk whose Milk Solid Non‑Fat (MSNF) content was 7.7%, below the statutory standard of 8.5%. He argued that the delay in analysis caused a marginal shortfall, that he was denied the right under Section 13(2) to have a second sam…

The Academy of Nutrition Improvement and others challenged the constitutionality of Rule 44‑1 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955, which prohibited the sale of non‑iodised common salt for human consumption. The petitioners argued that the rule violated Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution and…

The Supreme Court examined the constitutionality of Rule 44 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955, which bans the sale and manufacture of non‑iodised common salt. Several writ petitions and transfer petitions challenging this rule were consolidated, and the Court allowed the transfer of five pending cases …

The Superintendent of a district jail was prosecuted under Section 16(1)(a) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 after a food inspector found rice and turmeric stored for prisoners to be adulterated. The prosecution alleged that the jail official had "stored" adulterated food, which under the Act is punisha…

The Bombay Hawkers' Union and several hawkers filed writ petitions under Article 32 challenging sections 313, 313‑A, 314(3) and 497 of the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act, 1888, alleging that the provisions gave the municipal authorities unfettered power to refuse licences and remove goods without a hearing, thereby v…

The appellants, manufacturers of pan masala and gutka, challenged state notifications issued under Section 7(iv) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 that prohibited the manufacture, sale, storage and distribution of these products in the interest of public health. The questions before the Supreme Court wer…

A food inspector found toffees sold by a shop to be adulterated under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. The Municipal Corporation of Delhi filed a complaint against the manufacturer, its manager and its directors. The Metropolitan Magistrate summoned all accused, but the Delhi High Court quashed the proceedings …

The appellant was prosecuted under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 for selling camel's milk to a food inspector, the milk having 25% added water. The trial court acquitted him on the ground that no specific standard existed for camel's milk, but the Rajasthan High Court convicted him, holding that camel's…

The case concerned an order by a Judicial Magistrate that impleaded Mis. Omprakash Shivprakash Ltd as the sixth accused in a prosecution under Section 16(1) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954. The appellant challenged the order, arguing that the magistrate had no jurisdiction to invoke Section 20‑A of the…