9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Interpretation of Rule 9(j) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act - whether failure to supply Public Analyst's Report within 10 days is fatal to prosecution.
Summary: The Supreme Court addressed the question of whether the failure to supply a copy of the Public Analyst's Report within the stipulated 10-day period under Rule 9(j) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act was fatal to a prosecution. The Court emphasized that there are no fixed tests to determine if a provision is mandatory or directory, and the purpose and object of the statute must be considered. The Court highlighted that when enforcing a provision strictly would defeat the purpose of the statute, it should be considered directory rather than mandatory. In this case, Rule 9(j) was viewed as an instruction to expedite the process and provide time for the accused to challenge the report. The Court concluded that Rule 9(j) was directory, not mandatory, and dismissed the petition. Previous decisions holding Rule 9(j) as mandatory were deemed not valid law.
|
