In Brief
The appellant was convicted of selling adulterated buffalo milk without a license under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954. The Supreme Court allowed his appeal and acquitted him. The Court found that the prosecution failed to prove: (1) actual delivery of the Analyst's report to the appellant, merely showing despatch without proof of service; (2) that the sample was taken properly with stirring to ensure homogeneity of milk constituents; and (3) that uncorroborated Food Inspector testimony sufficed when the mandatory independent witness turned hostile. Strict compliance with statutory safeguards protecting the accused is required in food adulteration prosecutions.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.