IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.R.UDAYABHANU FRIDAY, THE 29TH JUNE 2007 / 8TH ASHADHA 1929 Crl.MC.No. 388 of 2000(C) ------------------------- S.T.NO.505/99 IN THE FILE OF THE JFCM-I, NEYYATTINKARA C.C.NO.442/99 IN THE FILE OF THE JFCM-II, NEDUMANGAD S.T.2026/99 IN THE FILE OF THE JFCM-I, CHERTHALA C.C.NO.995/99 IN THE FILE OF THE JFCM-II, KOLLAM PETITIONERS: -------------------- 1. M.BASHEER DIRECTOR, KILBAN FOODS (INDIA) PVT. LTD. POOVATTUPARAMBA, KOZHIKODE. 2. KILBAN FOODS (INDIA) PVT. LTD. POOVATTUPARAMBA. BY ADV. SRI.SHAJI P.CHALY SRI.M.N.SANJITH RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. FOOD INSPECTOR, NEYYATTINKARA CIRCLE (FOOD INSPECTOR, PALLICHAL PANCHAYATH) NEYYATTINKARA, TRIVANDRUM DISTRICT. 3. FOOD INSPECTOR NEDUMANGAD CIRCLE (ADDITIONAL CHARGE NEDUMANGAD MUNICIPALITY) TRIVANDRUM DISTRICT. 4. FOOD INSPECTOR CHERTHALA MUNICIPALITY (CHERTHALA CIRCLE, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.) 5. FOOD INSPECTOR, KOLLAM CIRCLE CHINNAKKADA, KOLLAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.AMJAD ALI THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/06/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: CRL.M.C.NO.388/2000 ORDER ON CRL.M.P.NO.350/2000 IN CRL.M.C.NO.388/2000 DISMISSED 29.6.2007 SD/- K.R.UDAYABHANU, JUDGE /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE K.R.UDAYABHANU, J --------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.388 of 2000 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of June, 2007 O R D E R The petitioners are the accused in S.T.No.505/99, C.C.No.442/99, S.T.No.2026/99 and C.C.No.995/99 for the offences under Section 2(ia)(a)(j) Section 7(i) Section 16(1) I-A(a) and Rules 29 (d) and 30 of the Food Adulteration Rules as it was found that the soft drink concentrate purchased by the Food Inspector from the respective shops were found to contain synthetic colour exceeding the limit prescribed under Rule 30 of the PFA Rules wherein the limit prescribed is 'not exceed 100 parts per million'. 2. The contention in the instant case is that what has been examined at the laboratory is the soft drink concentrate and not the final food or beverage for consumption. Hence, the above mode of testing adopted by the public analyst is in violation of Rule 30 of PFA Rules. For the above reason, in the above said cases the prosecution cannot be sustained. Hence, the entire proceedings initiated in the above cases S.T.No.505/99, C.C.No.442/99, S.T.No.2026/99 and C.C.No.995/99 are herewith quashed. The Crl.M.C. is disposed of accordingly. K.R.UDAYABHANU, JUDGE csl