LexSRI KRISHAN GOPAL SHARMA AND ANR versus GOVERNMENT OF N.C.T. O F DELHI
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A
SRI KRISHAN GOPAL SHARM\ AND ANR.
\'.
GOVERNMENT OF N.C.T. < F DELHI
MAY 7, 1996.
B
[G.N. RAY AND B.L. HANS,,RIA, JJ.]
Prevelltiun of Food Adulteration Rules, 19:·5: Rule 47.
Pa11 Masa/a and Mo11th Freshner-Samphs of-Co11tained sacchaiin
C to exte11t of 2000 and 2450 p.p.m. in violation 'f the then R.47-Ciimina/
cases initiated against the accused-Subsequent(' 1 R.47 anu:nded to pennit
sacchaii11 to extent of 8000 p.p.m.-Accused filea petition in High Cowt for
q11ashing of C1imina/ case.1-He/d: uname11ded R•i/e 47 valid and operative
at relevant tilne-Petition rightly disniissed by Hi!: 11 Court-However, in view
of amendment of Rule 47 use of saccharin to exit it of 2000 a11d 2450 p.p.m.
D was 11ot injwious to health-Accused committed only technical offence-In
the circtunstances of the case, c1in1inal cases al:,' iinst accused quashed on
payn1cnt of costs quantified at Rs. 7,50(}-Prevenion of Food Adulteration
Act, 1954, Ss 7 and 16.
E
F
Pa11 Masa/a-{fser of sacclzmi11 in-Restiic io11 of-Imposed by Rule
making authmity on basis of huma11 know/edp widely accepted by ex-
perts'-Addition of sacchaii11 to extent of 8000 p.1 '.m. a/lowed by amendi11g
Rule 47 011 basis of later research on effect of racchaiin 011 human sys-
tem--He/d: Validity of R11/e 47 p1ior to its amendment could not be chal-
/e11ged on gro1111d of arbitrary and cap1icious exercise of power.
Words a11d Phrases : "Pan Masa/a" a11d "A 'outh Freslmer"-Mea11ing
of-!11 the co11text of Sectio11 2(v) of Prevention 'f Food Adulteration Act,
1954.
Samples of pan masala and mouth freshner purchased from the
G appellants-accused were found adulterated by tlie Public Analyst as both
the samples contained saccharin to the extent >f 2000 p.p.m. and 2450
p.p.m. respectively. At the relevant time when the said samples were
purchased, under the existing Rule 44(g) and Ru e 47 of the Prevention of
Food Adulteration Rules, 1955, the saccharin cantents as found by the
H Public Analyst in the samples were in violation of· he Rules. Criminal cases
472
..
'
K.G. SHARMA v. GOVT. OF N.C.T. OF DELI-II
473
against the ap11ellants-accused were initiated in the Court of the A
Metropolitan Magistrate under Sections 7 and 16 of the Prevention of
Food Adulteration Act, 1954 on the basis of the complaint made by th~
Local Health Authority. The High Court dismissed the petition filed by the
appellants-accused under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code,
1973 for quashing the aforesaid criminal cases.
B
Jn the appeal before this Court, on behalf of the accused persons it
was contended that addition of saccharin to the extent of 8000 p.p.m. in
pan masala bad been allowed by subse<1uent amendment of Rule 47 of the
Rules; that the articles sold were not alleged to be injurious to health; that
there was no allegation that any other injurious substance was added to C
the articles sold making them potential health hazards; that pall' masala
and mouth fresbner were not of inferior <1uality and substandard; and that
it must be held that even before amendment of Rule 47 of the Rules use of
saccharin to the extent found did not constitute an offence under the Act.
Disposing of the appeal, this Court
D
HELD: 1.1. At the relevant time when the samples'of the pan masala
and the mouth freshner were taken, the saccharin content as found by the
Public Analyst in the said articles of food was in violation of Rule 47 of
the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955. The pan masala and the E
mouth freshner are undoubtedly within the meaning of 'food' under Sec-
tion 2(v) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954. 'Food' under
the said Act has been defined very widely. The validity of Rule 47 prior to
its amendment restricting the user of saccharin in pan masala cannot be
challenged on the ground of arbitrary and capricious exercise of power by F
the Rule making authority. It bas not been demonstrated that despite
widely accepted view by the experts about the effect on saccharin on human
system on the basis of information flowing from research and analysis, the
restriction of user of saccharin in Pan Masala or Mouth }""reshner as
imposed in Rule 47 of the Rules at the relevant time was wholly arbitrary, G
unjust and capricious. Human knowledge is not static. The conception
about the harmful effect of saccharin on human system has undergone
changes because of information derived from further research and
analysis. The kExcerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.