#Prevention of Food Adulteration Act

Allahabad HC quashes 20-year-old prosecutions under the repealed Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, ruling that continuing proceedings under a repealed statute constitutes abuse of process. The judgment mandates quashing of all pending PFA Act cases post-enactment of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, impacting food industry stakeholders facing legacy prosecutions.

Allahabad High Court allows commutation of a one-year sentence under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act to a fine deposit of Rs. 10,000, despite the statutory minimum sentence, citing a 15-year delay in justice. The ruling underscores judicial discretion to balance societal harm with prolonged incarceration, setting a precedent for similar cases involving delayed trials.

Bombay High Court rules that food traders cannot be penalized under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act if they prove compliance with statutory defences under Section 19(2). The court set aside suspension orders, emphasizing that authorities must apply the statutory protection before imposing penalties, ensuring natural justice for traders.

Kerala High Court rules that a salesman selling adulterated food (tartrazine in banana chips) is criminally liable under Section 16(1A)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, even if the shop owner is acquitted. The judgment reinforces strict vicarious liability for employees in food safety violations, irrespective of employer culpability.

HP High Court acquitted a vendor under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, ruling that failure to prove the cleanliness of the intermediary vessel used for sampling renders the conviction unsustainable, even if adulteration is confirmed. The judgment underscores strict adherence to procedural safeguards in food safety prosecutions, impacting food inspectors and vendors alike.