Bombay High Court Quashes Food Safety Case Against Britannia Dairy Over Allegedly Unsafe Cheese Cubes

The Bombay High Court has quashed criminal proceedings against Britannia Dairy Private Limited over allegations concerning unsafe Britannia Cheese Cubes, holding that the company was denied statutory safeguards under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006. The Court observed that the delay in issuing notice, non-supply of the laboratory testing report and consequent deprivation of the Applicant's statutory rights to have the food sample tested by a referral laboratory and to file an appeal rendered continuation of the proceedings entirely untenable.

Justice Ranjitsinha Raja Bhonsale was hearing an application filed by Britannia Dairy Private Limited seeking quashing of Criminal Case pending before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, and the order issuing process dated July 28, 2014. The Applicant is a wholly owned subsidiary of Britannia Industries Limited.

The case concerned Britannia Cheese Cubes (Sour Cream and Onion), manufactured by Schreiber Dynamix Dairies Limited and marketed by the Applicant. A sample of the cheese put for testing by the Food Safety Officer indicated that the sample was infested with fungus and was unsafe under Section 3(1)(zz)(iii) and (x) of the FSS Act.

The Applicant was issued notice only on May 17, 2014, after expiry of the product's shelf life. The Applicant contended that the delay deprived it of the option to have the fourth part of the sample analysed by an NABL-accredited/FSSAI-notified laboratory and also prevented it from filing an appeal against the Food Analyst Report.

The Court examined the relevant provisions, noting that the Applicant, as the marketer whose name appeared on the product label, was entitled to receive notice when the sample was taken and proposed to be sent for analysis, to seek analysis of the fourth part of the sample and to file an appeal against the Food Analyst Report.

“By issuing a notice after the expiry of the shelf life, the Applicant has clearly lost its right to exercise the option available under 2.4.5(1) and 2.4.6 of the FSS Rules… the report of the Food Analyst was not provided to the Applicant… the Applicant has also been denied its right of preferring an Appeal… as the Food Analyst Report was never forwarded to the Applicant,” the Court remarked.

The Court further found that the order issuing process was a “rubber stamp order” not reflecting any application of mind, and that since some accused resided beyond the Magistrate's territorial jurisdiction, an inquiry under Section 202 of the CrPC was mandatory before issuance of process.

The Court held that the Respondent No.2 failed to comply with the statutory provisions of the FSS Act, emphasizing that the procedural safeguards under the Act have to be complied with in letter and spirit. It observed:

“It cannot be that the mandatory provisions and safeguards as provided under the FSS Act which is a Special Act are not complied with in their proper letter and spirit. It cannot be that, the noticee/proposed accused is denied the opportunity which is available under the statute to prove its innocence or have a probable defence.”

mandatory provisions and safeguards under the FSS Act could not be disregarded and that the noticee/proposed accused could not be denied the opportunity available under the statute to prove its innocence or have a probable defence. It held that the provisions of the FSS Act had to be strictly complied with.

Consequently, the Court held that allowing the criminal proceedings to continue would amount to a clear abuse of the process of the Court. It allowed the application under Section 482 CrPC, now Section 528 of the BNSS, and quashed and set aside the proceedings.

Case Title: Britannia Dairy Private Limited v. The State of Maharashtra [Criminal Application No. 842 of 2017]

Click Here To Read/Download Order