Skip to main content

SC urges life term for milk adulterators

The Supreme Court yesterday urged state governments to consider making necessary amendments to the law to make production and marketing of adulterated milk, which is injurious to human consumption, an offence punishable with life imprisonment.

The observation by a bench of Justice K S Radhakrishnan and Justice A K Sikri came after it took note of Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal and Odisha having made the sale of adulterated milk, contaminated with synthetic material, an offence punishable with life imprisonment.

“That shows the seriousness of the offence. That is why they have made it punishable by life imprisonment. Adulterated milk having synthetic material is harmful to heart, lungs, liver and is even cancerous. It also affects ladies, also those pregnant,” observed Justice Radhakrishnan.

Asking the states to make more stringent the law to deal with production and sale of milk which is harmful to human beings, the court observed that the maximum punishment of six months for such offences under the Food Safety and Standards Act was grossly inadequate.

The court was hearing a public suit by Haridwar-based Swami Achyutanand, which said samples collected by the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India in 2011 revealed large-scale sale of adulterated milk across the country. As petitioner’s counsel Anurag Tomar questioned the size of the sample, the court asked him what information was available with him. “You can’t just file a PIL (based on a report) and leave the rest to the court.”

Seeking the details of prosecution launched in the cases of milk adulteration having synthetic material and the number of convictions, the court said though every year thousands of tonnes of sweets are seized and destroyed during festive season of Diwali and Holi, they are not accompanied with prosecution of those involved in making and selling adulterated sweets.

“What happened to those cases? That should be told to us,” observed Justice Sikri. “It is happening. If (state is) not able to apprehend or detect, then it is a failure of the food department.”

“Without a drop of milk, they can make milk,” observed Justice Radhakrishnan.

Mocking the reports by Delhi, Haryana, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh governments which said that most of the cases of milk adulteration involved mixing of water and powder, the court said: “We are not happy with the details given in the affidavits.”

“On paper, everything is good but the ground reality is different,” observed Justice Sikri.

Referring to a report by NGO VOICE that said synthetic milk with synthetic materials like caustic soda, blotting paper, detergents, including white paint to make it look white, were being used, the court said that none of the adulterated samples revealed this kind of adulteration.

Comments

Most viewed this month

Procedure to be followed on admissibility of additional evidence at appeal stage

In The Corporation of Madras vs M. Parthasarathy & Ors., the trial court had allowed the respondent company to file evidence in the form of photocopies and had dismissed all the four suits filed by the respondents with costs as the evidence were in the form of photocopies and were objected to by the respondents. On appeal the Additional District Judge allowed the respondents to file additional evidence in the form the original documents of the earlier admitted photocopies and based on the same allowed the appeal. In its turn the High Court also dismissed the appeal filed by the appellants who in turn approached the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court decided that the first Appellate Court committed two jurisdictional errors in allowing the appeals.  Referring to earlier judgements of the Supreme Court in Land Acquisition Officer, City Improvement Trust Board vs. H. Narayanaiah & Ors., , Shalimar Chemical Works Ltd. vs. Surendra Oil & Dal Mills (Refineri...

The recovery of vehicles by the financier not an offence - SC

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 8907  of 2009 Anup Sarmah (Petitioner) Vs Bhola Nath Sharma & Ors.(Respondents) The petitioner submitted that  respondents-financer had forcibly taken away the vehicle financed by them and  illegally deprived the petitioner from its lawful possession  and  thus,  committed  a crime. The complaint filed by the petitioner had been  entertained  by  the Judicial Magistrate (Ist Class), Gauhati (Assam) in Complaint Case  No.  608 of 2009, even directing the interim custody of the vehicle (Maruti  Zen)  be given to the petitioner vide order dated  17.3.2009.  The respondent on approaching the Guwahati High  Court against this order, the hon'ble court squashed the criminal  proceedings  pending   before  the  learned Magistrate. After hearing both sides, the Hon'ble Supreme Court decided on 30th...

Court approached in the early stages of arbitration will prevail in all other subsequent proceedings

In National Highway Authority of India v. Hindustan Steelworks Construction Limited, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court opined that once the parties have approached a certain court for relief under Act at earlier stages of disputes then it is same court that, parties must return to for all other subsequent proceedings. Language of Section 42 of Act is categorical and brooks no exception. In fact, the language used has the effect of jurisdiction of all courts since it states that once an application has been made in Part I of the Act then ―that Court alone shall have jurisdiction over arbitral proceedings and all subsequent applications arising out of that agreement and arbitral proceedings shall be made in that Court and in no other Court. Court holds that NHAI in present case cannot take advantage of Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for explaining inordinate delay in filing present petition under Section 34 of this Act in this Court.