Kerala HC: Ex-CISF Personnel can Buy Liquor from CAPF Canteens  ||  Kerala HC: Accused Can Respond Virtually or in Writing  ||  Kerala HC: No Caste or Lineage Required for Temple Priests  ||  Kerala HC Orders SIT Probe into Sabarimala Gold Loss  ||  Kerala HC Cancels Mohanlal’s Ivory Ownership Certificates  ||  Allahabad High Court : Deceased Farmer’s Odd Jobs Don’t Bar Family from Scheme Benefits  ||  Secured Creditors' Dues Take Priority Over Govt Claims: Allahabad HC on SARFAESI & RDB Acts  ||  Daughter Can’t Claim Mitakshara Father’s Property if He Died Pre-1956 & Son Survives: HC  ||  Gujarat High Court: Sessions Court Can’t Suspend Sentence Just to Allow Revision Filing  ||  Delhi High Court: Non-Combat Security Roles Crucial; Minor Lapse Risks National Safety    

Kishore Biyani v. The State of Jharkhand and Ors. - (High Court of Jharkhand) (29 Sep 2015)

Court dismisses food adulteration proceedings against Kishore Biyani

MANU/JH/1169/2015

Food Adulteration

In a case where upon finding a violation of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955 for insufficient information on the label of ‘Chana Besan’ sold in ‘Big Bazar and summons were issued on the Managing Director of Pantaloon Retail (India), the Court quashed not only the summons but also the food adulteration proceedings. Noting that the packets of ‘Chana Besan’ made clear that the singular content of the packet was ‘chana’, it was not necessary to repeat the ‘ingredient’ under the Rules. Further, even if the proceedings were not quashed, Pantaloon Retail (India) would have to be arrayed as an accused, which it had not been, under Section 17 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, in order to make Petitioner vicariously liable.

Relevant : Section 2 Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 Act Section 17 Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 Act

Tags : FOOD ADULTERATION   VICARIOUS   MANAGEMENT   COMPANY   MISBRANDING  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2025 - All Rights Reserved