M. V. KRISHNAN NAMBISSAN versus STATE OF KERALA

Citation: [1966] 3 S.C.R. 373 · Decided: 18-01-1966 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K. SUBBA RAO · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

• 
• 
I 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
M. V. KRISHNAN NAMBISSAN 
v. 
STATE OF KERALA 
January 18, 1966 
(K. SUBBA RAO, M. HIDAYATULLAH AND 
R. S. BACHAWAT, JJ.] 
373 
Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (37 of 1954), ss. 7 and 16(1) 
(a)(i) and Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, rr. 5, 44 and Ap,.endi:x 
B-Butter-mi1k-Standard of quality whether specified. 
The appellant was the manager of a dairy farm. 
He was charged 
with an offence under ss. 7 and 16(1) (a) (i) 
of the Prevention of Food 
Adulteration Act, 1954, read with r. 44 of the Prevention of Food Adul-
teration Rules, 1955, in that, he exposed for sale skimmed thick butter-
milk, which to analysis, 
was fonnd to be adulterated with water 
tD 
the extent of 11 per cent, and had thus not maintained the standard pres-
cribed for butter-milk. The trial Court acquitted him on the ground that 
no standard of quality was prescribed for butter-milk. 
On appeal, the 
High Court convicted him, on the view that, the standard for milk h•s 
been fixed by the Rules, that the same standard was made applicable to 
curd and that, as butter.milk was in essence curd from which butter has 
been extracted, butter-milk should contain the same quantity of solids-not-
fat as curd should contain . 
In appeal to this Court, 
HELD . Appendix B to the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 
which specifies the standards of quality of various articles of food, shows 
that it is not an ingredient of the definition of butter-milk that it should 
contain any particular percentage of solids-not-fat. 
Wherever the rule-
making authority intended to prescribe a specific standard for the contents 
of a product, it definitely stated so, but in the case of butter-milk, no 
standard for contents either specifically or with reference to other items 
is prescribed. The only requirement is that it shall be a product obtained 
after removal of butter from curd by churning or otherwise. Therefore, 
the appellant had not committed the offence with which hy was charged. 
(377 C, F-H] 
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION :. Criminal Appeal No. 93 
of 1964. 
Appeal from the judgment and order dated October 11, 1963 
G 
of the Kerala High Court in Criminal Appeal No. 153 of 1962. 
H 
R. Ganapathy Iyer, for the appellant. 
P. Govinda Menon and M. R. K. Pillai, for the respondent. 
The judgment of the Court was delivered by 
Subba Rao, J. The appellant is the manager of the Palghat 
Depot of Messrs. Nambissan's D. V. Dairy Farm. On July 20, 
1961, one' of the Food Inspectors visited his depot and purchased 
from the second accused, the salesman in cha.rge of the depot, two 
374 
SUPREME COURT 
REPORTS 
(1966] 3 S.C.R. 
nazlzies of "skimmed thick butter-milk" out of the stock exposed 
for sale in the depot. 
He sent a sample of it for analysis to the 
Public Analyst. The Analyst reported that the solids-not-fat 
content in the said sample was 7.5 per cent. as against 8 · 5 per cent. 
prescribed for curd: he was of the opinion that the sample contair;-
ed not less than 11 per cent. of added water. When the sample 
was analysed a few months later hy the Central Food Analyst, he 
reported that the solids-not-fat content in the sample was only 6·4 
per cent. Thereupon a complaint was filed in the Court of the Dis-
trict Magistrate (Judicial), Palghat, against the .ippcllant and his 
sales-man-we arc not concerned in this appeal with the charge 
against the sales-man. The charge against the appellant was that 
he committed an offence under s. 16(l)(a)(i) and >. 7 of the Preven-
tion of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (37 of 1954), hereinafter called 
the Act, read with r. 44 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration 
Rules, 1955, hereinafter called the Rules. The charge against him 
was that he exposed for sale "~kimmed thick butter-milk" which on 
analysis was found to be adulterated with water tJ the extent of 11 
per cent. The learned District Magistrate, on a consideration of 
the entire evidence placed before him, came to the conclusion that 
the appellant was not guilty of the offence with which he was 
charged: he held that no standard of quality was prescribed for 
butter-milk and, therefore, the accused could not be convicted 
for the offence under the Act and the Rules. On appeal, the High 
Court took the view that the standard for milk had been fixed by 
the Rules, that the same standard was made applicable to curd 
and that, as butter-milk was in essence curd from which butter had 
been extracted, the butter-milk shoul

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.