Supreme Court of India Judgements

46550 Judgements hosted as on 16/07/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Food Safety and Standards Act

Food Safety and Standards Act

Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 – Section 16(1)(a)(i) read with Section 7 – Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 – Section 52 – Misbranding – The Supreme Court upheld the conviction but considered the new Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, which provides for a lesser penalty for misbranding, leading to a reduction in the sentence – Appellant no.2’s sentence was converted to a fine, and appellant no.1’s fine was upheld – The appeal was partly allowed.

Mar 9, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M/S A.K. SARKAR AND COMPANY AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Sudhanshu Dhulia…

Food Safety and Standards Act

Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 – Section 3(1)(j) – The Supreme Court held that the writ petition was not maintainable as it was filed by an interested party with a personal motive – The Supreme Court also held that there was no illegality or arbitrariness in the board’s decision to procure cardamom from local sources in view of the urgency and the transparency – The Supreme Court directed the State Government to destroy the existing stock of prasadam in an appropriate manner.

Mar 9, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD — Appellant Vs. AYYAPPA SPICES AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : A.S. Bopanna and Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, JJ. )…

Food Safety and Standards Act I P C

Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 (FSSA) – Sections 3(zz), 59 and 89 – Penal Code, 1860(IPC) – FSSA is a comprehensive and exhaustive legislation on all aspects of food and food safety, and that Section 89 of the FSSA gives an overriding effect to its provisions over any other law, including the IPC, in so far as the law applies to the aspects of food covered by the FSSA

Mar 3, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAM NATH — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Sanjay Karol, JJ.…

Food Safety and Standards Act

Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 – Sections 52 and 89 – Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 – Section 16 – Penalty for misbranded food – Punishment under PFA and the penalty under the FSSA cannot be imposed on the violator for the same misbranding because it will amount to double jeopardy – in such a situation, in view of the overriding effect given to the provisions of the FSSA, the violator who indulges in misbranding cannot be punished under the PFA and he will be liable to pay penalty under the FSSA in accordance with Section 52 thereof.

Dec 17, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MANIK HIRU JHANGIANI — Appellant Vs. STATE OF M.P. — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Sanjay Karol, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…

You missed

Tenders & Contracts

E-auction — Typographical error — e-auction for a manganese and iron ore block submitted a bid of 140.10% instead of its intended bid of 104.10% due to a typographical error — The court allowed the company’s appeal and ordered a fresh e-auction for the block — The company was also ordered to pay Rs 3 crore ($400,000) to the state as compensation for the delay caused by its error.

Jul 20, 2024 sclaw
Corporate

Drugs (Price Control) Order, 1995 — Paragraph 13 — Recovery of overcharged amount of drugs — Demand made by the National Pharmaceutical Pricing Authority (NPPA) to recover an overcharged amount for a Cloxacillin-based drug formulation called Roscilox — The Court found that the appellant’s admission of purchasing the drug directly from the manufacturer made it liable under Paragraph 13 of the Drugs (Price Control) Order, 1995 (DPCO) — The Court also rejected the appellant’s claim that it was only a ‘dealer’ and not a ‘distributor’ under the DPCO, as the definitions of these terms under the DPCO are not mutually exclusive — The Court further noted that the objective of the DPCO is to control the prices of medicinal drug formulations and ensure they are made available to the common man, and thus, the provision should not be subjected to a restricted or hidebound interpretation — Appeal Dismissed.

Jul 20, 2024 sclaw
I P C Matrimonial

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 498A, 323 and 504 — Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 — Sections 3 and 4 — Irretrievable breakdown of marriage as a ground for divorce — The court recognized that irretrievable breakdown of marriage, where the parties have been living separately for a significant period and all efforts at reconciliation have failed, can be a valid ground for divorce — This expands the grounds for divorce beyond the traditional grounds mentioned in the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.— One-time settlement as a mode of permanent alimony — The court allowed the parties to opt for a one-time settlement as a mode of permanent alimony, instead of periodic payments — This provides flexibility to the parties in resolving their financial obligations towards each other.

Jul 20, 2024 sclaw
Service

Bihar City Manager Cadre (Appointment and Service Conditions) Rules, 2014 — Rules 5 and 11 — The Supreme Court has dismissed appeals challenging the validity of a judgment by the Patna High Court, which allowed a candidate to be considered for appointment as a City Manager in Bihar — The candidate had scored to meet up the minimum qualifying marks of 32% — The court found that the minimum qualifying marks were only for the written test and not for the overall selection process — The court also rejected the appellants’ reliance on an executive order issued in 2007, stating that it was not applicable to the rules issued in 2014 — The court concluded that the candidate was eligible and qualified to be considered for appointment as she had met the minimum qualifying marks in the written test.

Jul 20, 2024 sclaw