In a rare development, the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-I has delivered judgments in four-decades-old cases of food adulteration involving low-fat content in milk and substandard sugar. The verdicts, pronounced in the last week of November, imposed fines and symbolic imprisonment on the accused, marking the conclusion of cases filed under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (PFA Act 1954).
Moti Lal, a milk vendor from Allunagar Diguriya, was penalised 42 years after being found guilty of selling milk with fat content below the permissible standard. On October 24, 1982, the Food Safety and Drug Administration (FSDA) collected a sample of milk from him, which failed the fat content test. The court fined him Rs 3,000 and sentenced him to remain in court custody until the court adjourned for the day.
Similarly, Ram Lal, a milk vendor from Indiranagar, was found guilty of selling adulterated milk with 30% less fat. His sample was taken by the FSDA on June 22, 1988, at Wireless Square. The court imposed the same punishment on him as Moti Lal.
In a third case, Keshav, the owner of a dairy in Semrapreetpur, Gosainganj, was also convicted for milk adulteration. A sample collected from his dairy revealed 22% less fat than the prescribed standard. He was fined Rs 3,000 and given a similar symbolic sentence.
Reacting to the verdict, an FSDA official said, “This judgment, though delayed, reiterates the importance of food safety laws. Adulteration in essential commodities like milk affects the health of countless individuals, especially children.”
The court also resolved a 21-year-old case involving adulterated sugar. On September 8, 2003, FSDA officials collected a sample from the shop of Suresh Chandra Gupta, a resident of Bakshi Ka Talab (BKT).
Tests revealed that the sucrose content was below the minimum standard, and excessive moisture was present. Gupta was found guilty and fined Rs 6,000. Like the milk vendors, he was also sentenced to remain in court custody until the court closed for the day.
Advocate RK Sharma remarked, “It’s unfortunate that justice took decades, but the verdict reinforces the importance of strict food safety enforcement.. These judgments highlight the prolonged delays in resolving cases under the PFA Act. Experts and legal observers have pointed to the need for streamlining judicial processes to ensure timely verdicts in such cases.
The FSDA, while welcoming the verdicts, emphasised the importance of robust monitoring to prevent food adulteration and protect public health. While the penalties might seem symbolic compared to today’s standards, these cases serve as a reminder of the need for both accountability and efficiency in food safety enforcement.