TMI Blog1985 (3) TMI 302X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vidence in support of the case of the prosecution that the lal mirchi powder was adulterated. It was contended before the learned Magistrate that the evidence by way of the Public Analyst's report does not satisfy the requirement of the definition of 'adulterated article' of food contained in s. 2 (1) (f) of the Act. The learned Magistrate accepted this contention and found that the prosecution has failed to prove that the lal mirchi powder was adulterated and he accordingly acquitted the respondent. The Calcutta High Court in M/s Narkeklange Roller Flour Mills and another v. The Corporation of Calcutta 1973 (Prevention of Food Adulteration Cases) 257. has observed: .... Clause (f) of Section 2 defines the word 'adulterated' and an article of food is said to be adulterated if it is insect infested. By physical examination the Public A,nalyst found blackish worms and the sample there is at best worm infested. Is the word worm synonymous with 'insect' ? Did the legislature intend to condemn wheat products due to presence of seasonal worms? The word 'insect' is defined in the Oxford Dictionary as small invertebrate segmented animal having he ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oration of Delhi v. Kacheroo Mal, [1976] 2 S.C.R 1., the Public Analyst had reported: Date of Analysis: 10-1-1969, Insect-infested pieces of Kajus: 21.9% and I am of the opinion that the same is adulterated due to insect infested pieces of Kajus to the extent of 21.9% Sarkaria, J. speaking for himself and Gupta, J. has observed in that case: In view of the construction that the expression 'insect-infested', includes infestation even by dead insects, the further point to be considered is, whether mere insect infestation, without more, would be sufficient to hold the article to be 'adulterated' within the meaning of sub-clause (f) of clause (I) of s. 2 of the Act .. The point sought to be made out is that in this case, the prosecution, the defence and the High Court all felt that the report of the Public Analyst was vague, inadequate and deficient, and in the absence of clear proof of the sample being unfit for human consumption, it could not constitute a valid basis for holding the article to be adulterated within the meaning of sec. 2(1)(f). As against the above, Mr. F.S. Nariman, the learned; Counsel for the appellant Corporation submits that in th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ischief of this sub- clause, and it would not be necessary in such a case to prove further that the article was unfit for human consumption. We would prefer the first construction as it comports best with reason, common sense, realities, the tenor of this provision and the main purpose and scheme of the Act. The adjectives filthy , putrid ', disgusting , decomposed , rotten .. insect-infested refer to the quality of the article and furnish the indicia for presuming the article to be unfit for human consumption. But the presumption may not be conclusive in a cases, irrespective of the character of the article, and the nature and extent of the vice afflicting it..... In Dhanraj's case (I.L.R. 1970 Delhi 681) the High Court construed this sub-clause (f) thus: The word 'otherwise' in sub-clause (f) of cl. (I) of sec. 2 does suggest that all the adjectives used earlier refer to the quality of the article being unfit for human consumption. To fall under that sub-clause an article of food must be unfit for human consumption because it consists wholly or in part of any filthy, putrid, disgusting, rotten, decomposed or diseased animal or vegetable substance or becau ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ilthy, putrid, disgusting, rotten, decomposed or diseased animal or vegetable substance or because it is insect- infested or on account of any other cause, We are of the opinion that the High Court was clearly wrong in its inter-pretation of s. 2(1)(f). On the plain language of the definition section it is quite apparent that the words 'or is otherwise unfit for human consumption' are disjunctive of the rest of the words preceding them. It relates to a distinct and separate cclass altogether, It seems to us (1) [1980] I S.C.R., 910 that the last clause 'or is otherwise unfit for human consumption' is residuary provision which would apply to a case not covered by or falling squarely within the clauses preceding it. If the phrase is to be read disjunctively the mere proof of the article of food being 'filthy, putrid, rotten, decomposed .. Or insect- infested' would be per se sufficient to bring the case within the purview of the word 'adulterated' as defined in sub-cl. (f) and it would not be necessary in such a case to prove further that the article of food was unfit for human consumption. It is, however, pointed out that the construction place ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e is found to be insect-infested. With utmost respect, we are not able to share this view and would hold that the observations made in the Judgment should be confined to the particular facts of that case. The decision in Kacheroo Mal's case (supra) was largely based on the circumstances that the standard of quality and purity was not prescribed in respect of cashew nuts. Now that r. 48-B of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules; 1955 has been framed, the decision in Kacheroo Mal's case (Supra) is rendered inapplicable. We also constitute a Bench of equal strength. Therefore, I refrain from expressing any opinion as to which of the two aforesaid views is correct. Nor is it necessary for me to do so having regard to the facts of this case. Even if the nine worms found by the Public Analyst in the sample are considered to be insects, the certificate of the Public Analyst does not support the case of the prosecution that the lal mirchi powder was adulterated, for the Public Analyst ha- not expressed his opinion that the lal mirchi powder was either worm. infested or insect- infested or that on account of the presence of the meal worms the sample was unfit for hu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|