LexRAM NATH versus THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
* Author [2024] 2 S.C.R. 743 : 2024 INSC 138 Ram Nath v. The State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. (Criminal Appeal No. 472 of 2012) 21 February 2024 [Abhay S. Oka* and Sanjay Karol, JJ.] Issue for Consideration Interplay between the provisions of Chapter IX of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 (FSSA) and ss.272 and 273 of the Penal Code, 1860; whether the view taken by the Allahabad High Court in the case of M/s. Pepsico India Holdings (Pvt) Ltd. & Anr v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors., holding that after coming into force of the FSSA w.e.f 29th July 2010, it would have an overriding effect on other food related laws, including the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 and ss. 272, 273, IPC, challenged in Criminal Appeal No. 476-478 of 2012 is correct. Headnotes Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 – ss.89, 59 – Overriding effect of this Act over all other food related laws – Punishment for unsafe food – Penal Code, 1860 – ss.272, 273 – Adulteration of food or drink intended for sale – Sale of noxious food or drink – State of Uttar Pradesh issued an order granting power to the authorities to initiate prosecutions u/ss.272 and 273, IPC as well as under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 – FIRs were filed alleging commission of offences u/ss.272, 273, IPC – Petitions seeking quashing thereof, dismissed by High Court – Accused herein inter alia pleaded that s.89 will have an overriding effect over the provisions of the IPC: Held: By virtue of s.89 of the FSSA, s.59 will override the provisions of ss.272 and 273, IPC – Therefore, there will not be any question of simultaneous prosecution under both the statutes – Impugned orders set aside in Criminal Appeal Nos. 472 of 2012, 479 of 2012 and Criminal Appeal arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 1379 of 2011 – The offences, subject matter of these appeals are quashed and set aside – Authorities at liberty to act in accordance with the FSSA for offences 744 [2024] 2 S.C.R. Digital Supreme Court Reports punishable u/s.59 of the FSSA – Criminal Appeal Nos. 476- 478 of 2012, dismissed. [Paras 21, 22] Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 – ss.59, 48 – Penal Code, 1860 – ss.272, 273 – Offence u/s.59 of the FSSA made out even in absence of intention as provided in s.272, IPC – Knowledge an essential ingredient in sub- sec.1 of s.48, and thus, a part of s.59, FSSA: Held: When the offences u/ss.272 and 273, IPC are made out, even the offence u/s.59 of the FSSA will be attracted – In fact, offence u/s.59 of the FSSA is more stringent – s.273 of the IPC applies when a person sells or, offers or exposes for sale any article of food or drink which has been rendered noxious or has become unfit for food or drink – s.273 incorporates requirements of knowledge or reasonable belief that the food or drink sold or offered for sale is noxious – s.59 of the FSSA does not require the presence of intention as contemplated by s.272, IPC – Under s.59 of the FSSA, a person commits an offence who, whether by himself or by any person on his behalf, manufactures for sale or stores or sells or distributes any article of food for human consumption which is unsafe – So, the offence u/s.59 of the FSSA is made out even if there is an absence of intention as provided in s.272, IPC – However, knowledge is an essential ingredient in sub-sec.1 of s.48, and therefore, it will be a part of s.59 of the FSSA. [Para 18] Interpretation of Statutes – Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 – s.89 – Overriding effect of this Act over all other food related laws – Main Section gives overriding effect to the provisions of the FSSA over any other law – Section unambiguous, aid of the title of the Section or its marginal note not to be taken to interpret the same: Held: The title of the section indeed indicates that the intention is to give an overriding effect to the FSSA over all ‘food-related laws’ – However, in the main Section, there is no such restriction confined to ‘food-related laws’, and it is provided that provisions of the FSSA shall have effect [2024] 2 S.C.R. 745 Ram Nath v. The State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in any other law for the time being in force – So, the Section indicates that an overriding effect is given to the provisions of the FSSA over any other law – The settled law is that if the main Section is unambiguous, the aid of the title of the Section or its marginal note cannot be
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.