- Home
- /
- News Updates
- /
- 14 Days Time Limit For Analyzing...
14 Days Time Limit For Analyzing Sample & Issuing Report U/S 42 Of Food Safety Act Is Mandatory: Madras High Court
Upasana Sajeev
12 April 2022 4:42 AM GMT
The Madras High Court has recently allowed a petition for quashing proceedings under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 observing that the Designated Officer had not sent his recommendations on the food sample within a period of 14 days, as mandated under Section 42 of the Act. Justice K. Murali Shankar observed that the respondent had violated the "mandatory requirement"...
The Madras High Court has recently allowed a petition for quashing proceedings under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 observing that the Designated Officer had not sent his recommendations on the food sample within a period of 14 days, as mandated under Section 42 of the Act.
Justice K. Murali Shankar observed that the respondent had violated the "mandatory requirement" contemplated under Section 42 of the Act and therefore, the very launching of the complaint itself is not proper. The court also observed that when the authorities have not followed mandate, it is not reasonable to direct the petitioners to face the trial.
Sub-section 3 of Section 42 (Procedure for launching prosecution) states that the Food Analyst after receiving the sample from the Food Safety Officer shall analyse the sample and send the analysis report mentioning method of sampling and analysis within fourteen days to Designated Officer with a copy to Commissioner of Food Safety.
The Petitioner argued that sample candys were purchased from him on 20.07.2018, that the sample was received by the Food Analyst on 23.07.2018 for analysis, and though the Analyst report is dated 04.08.2018, the same was sent to the Designated Officer only on 06.08.2018, that the Designated Officer has sent his recommendation only on 16.08.2018 beyond 14 days.
The court referred to the decision of the Madras High Court in A.R.Khader Vs. The Food Safety Officer, Chennai District (2017), wherein it had quashed the complaint holding that milk sample would have become decomposed due to delay andthe right of the accused available under Section 13(2) has been frustrated, due to the inordinate delay and inaction on the part of the prosecution.
In the present case, the Court noted that the respondent in the complaint filed before the Jurisdictional Magistrate Court has no where whispered as to when the Designated Officer has received the report and send his recommendation.
Accordingly, the quashing petition was allowed.
The Petitioners were represented by Mr G. Karuppusamy Pandiyan while Advocate General Mr M. Muthumanikkam represented the respondent.
Case Title: S.Sakthivel & Anr v. The State rep. by the Food Safety Officer
Case No: Crl O.P(MD) 5994 of 2019
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 150
