Badri Prasad v. State Of M.P .

Factual and Procedural Background

The case concerns the sale of chillies powder by the appellant, from whom a Food Inspector purchased a sample. Although parameters such as moisture, total ash, ash insoluble in diluted hydrochloric acid, non-volatile ether extracts, and crude fibres were within permissible limits, the Public Analyst opined that the article was adulterated due to the addition of artificial colouring.

The appellant was convicted under Section 7 read with Section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954. The courts below imposed a sentence of six months’ rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs 1000. Leave to appeal was granted by this Court in 1989, and the appellant has been on bail since then. The present order addresses the appellant’s challenge to the conviction and sentence.

Legal Issues Presented

1. Whether chillies powder that otherwise conforms to prescribed compositional standards is deemed adulterated solely because artificial colouring has been added, in light of Appendix ‘B’ Item A.05.05.01 prohibiting such addition.
2. Whether the sentence imposed should be modified in the circumstances, including the appellant’s long-standing bail status since 1989 and the nature of the adulteration.

Arguments of the Parties

Appellant's Arguments

• The chillies powder conformed to the standards, with moisture, total ash, ash insoluble in diluted hydrochloric acid, non-volatile ether extracts, and crude fibres within permissible limits.
• Given this conformity, there was no cause for the Public Analyst to term the article adulterated.

State's Arguments

• The article was artificially coloured, and the governing rules in Appendix ‘B’ Item A.05.05.01 prohibit the addition of any colouring or flavouring matter to chillies powder.
• The addition of colouring by itself renders the article adulterated, irrespective of compliance with other parameters.

Table of Precedents Cited

No precedents were cited in the provided opinion.

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

The Court rejected the appellant’s contention that compliance with various compositional parameters negated adulteration. It relied on the clear prohibition in Appendix ‘B’ Item A.05.05.01 against adding colouring or flavouring matter to chillies powder. The Court held that the addition of colouring per se makes the article adulterated, and on that basis, it found no difficulty in sustaining the conviction under Section 7 read with Section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954.

On sentence, the Court observed that leave had been granted in 1989 and the appellant has been on bail since then, creating scope for leniency. It therefore scaled down the sentence from six months’ rigorous imprisonment to three months’ simple imprisonment, while sustaining the fine of Rs 1000 imposed by the courts below. To enable the appellant to seek conversion of the custodial sentence to a monetary penalty under Section 433(d), the Court noted that the adulteration consisted solely of adding a colouring agent, possibly to please the customer’s eye, and recommended that the State Government release the appellant upon charging an additional fine of Rs 2000.

The Court directed that an appropriate order be passed by the State Government within three months. The appellant must deposit in the trial court, within three weeks, the fine of Rs 1000 as imposed by the courts below and the alterable fine of Rs 2000, and inform the State Government of compliance. Upon doing so, the appellant need not be arrested.

Holding and Implications

CONVICTION UPHELD; SENTENCE MODIFIED; APPEAL DISPOSED OF.

Direct consequences: The conviction under Section 7 read with Section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, is affirmed. The custodial sentence is reduced to three months’ simple imprisonment; the fine of Rs 1000 is sustained. The Court recommends that the State Government, under Section 433(d), convert the sentence to a fine by releasing the appellant on payment of Rs 2000, with an order to be passed within three months. The appellant must deposit Rs 1000 and Rs 2000 in the trial court within three weeks and notify the State Government; if he does so, he need not be arrested.

Broader implications: The order reinforces that adding colouring matter to chillies powder is a per se violation under Appendix ‘B’ Item A.05.05.01, irrespective of compliance with other compositional standards. No broader doctrinal implications or new precedent are discussed.