9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Criminal appeal regarding alleged adulteration of milk, interpretation of legal standards u/r Prevention of Food Adulteration Act.
Summary: The Supreme Court delivered a judgment dismissing a criminal appeal involving the prosecution of a milk vendor for alleged adulteration. The case revolved around a minimal shortfall in the percentage of 'milk solids not fat' as per Rule 5 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules. The accused's plea of a possible marginal error in the analysis was rejected, leading to his conviction by the Magistrate. However, the Sessions Judge acquitted the accused, considering the deficiency as a permissible error. The Municipal Committee appealed to the High Court, which dismissed the appeal as trivial. The matter reached the Supreme Court, where it was highlighted that the case lacked substantial legal issues or public importance. The appellant's grievance was primarily against a passing reference to a previous court ruling, which was misinterpreted. The High Court correctly repelled the misuse of the ruling, emphasizing the importance of respecting judicial decisions even if they are obiter dicta. The Supreme Court underscored the need for certainty in legal standards, stating that variations could lead to unpredictability and unfair decisions. The appeal was deemed ill-advised, misconceived, and unnecessary, resulting in its dismissal.
|
