Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955

29 judgments · newest first · showing 1–29

THE STATE OF MAH and ORSversusGORAKH ARJUN MARATHE and ANR

DISMISSED

The State of Maharashtra appealed the acquittal of two vendors, Gorakh and Mohan Marathe, who were charged under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 for allegedly selling adulterated chilli powder. A food inspector collected a sample, and the public analyst’s report indicated the presence …

M/S SRI MAHAVIR AGENCY & ANR.versusTHE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ANR.

2023 INSC 375Appeal(s) allowed

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 …

VIJENDRAversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2019 INSC 845Appeal(s) allowed

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 …

HINDUSTAN UNILEVER LTD.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR.

2016 INSC 1176Appeal(s) allowed

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 …

SUBHASH CHANDversusSTATE (DELHI ADMINISTRATION)

2013 INSC 15Appeal(s) allowed

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 …

ACADEMY OF NUTRITION IMPROVEMENT AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA

2011 INSC 431Disposed off

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 …

SWADESI JAGARAN MANCHversusSTATE OF ORISSA & ANR.

2011 INSC 433Hearing Adjourned

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 …

PEPSICO INDIA HOLDINGS PVT. LTD.versusFOOD INSPECTOR AND ANR.

2010 INSC 786Appeal(s) allowed

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 …

DHARIWAL TOBAGO PRODUCTS LTD. AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

2008 INSC 1460Appeal(s) allowed

Dhariwal Tobaco Products Ltd. and its senior officials were charged with manufacturing adulterated Gutkha, violating Rule 62(1) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955. A Judicial Magistrate issued summons, and the accused filed an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal …

BENNY THOMASversusFOOD INSPECTOR, KOCHI AND ANR.

2008 INSC 774Dismissed

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 …

M/S PARAKH FOODS LTD.versusSTATE OF A.P. & ANR.

2008 INSC 411Case Allowed

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. …

STATE OF GUJARAT AND ANR.versusSHAILESHBHAI MANSUKHLAL SHAH AND ANR.

2007 INSC 672Case Allowed

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 …

DINESH KUMARversusSTATE OF M.P.

2004 INSC 624Appeal(s) allowed

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 …

DAYAL SINGHversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2004 INSC 262Dismissed

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 …

STATE OF H.P.versusNARENDRA KUMAR AND ANR.

2004 INSC 111Appeal(s) allowed

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 …

CALCUTTA MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONversusPAWAN K. SARAF AND ANR.

1999 INSC 9Dismissed

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 …

SRI KRISHAN GOPAL SHARMA AND ANRversusGOVERNMENT OF N.C.T. O F DELHI

1996 INSC 637Dismissed

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 …

R. BANERJEE AND ORS.versusH.D. DUBEY AND ORS

1992 INSC 80Appeal(s) allowed

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 …

M. RAJA MOHAMMED AND ANR.versusFOOD INSPECTOR, PALGHAT MUNICIPALITY

1991 INSC 313Disposed off

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 …

RAJENDRA AND TWO OTHERSversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

1991 INSC 158Disposed off

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 …

DINESHCHANDRA JAMNADAS GANDHIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT AND ANR.

1989 INSC 13Dismissed

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" …

STATE (DELHI ADMINISTRATION)versusPURAN MAL

1985 INSC 68Dismissed

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 …

STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusBABURAO RAVAJI MHARULKAR & ORS.

1984 INSC 198Case Partly allowed

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, …

STATE OF PUNJABversusDEVINDER KUMAR & ORS.

1983 INSC 35Appeal(s) allowed

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 …

S.S. DHANOAversusMUNICIPAL CORPORATION, DELHI & ORS.

1981 INSC 115Dismissed

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 …

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHversusTEK CHAND BHATIA

1979 INSC 203Appeal(s) allowed

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 …