The Supreme Court asserts that in cases of inconsistency, the Food Safety and Standards Act will take precedence over the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act

Case: MANIK HIRU JHANGIANI vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

Coram: Justices Abhay S. Oka and Sanjay Karol

Case No.: CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 3864 OF 2023

Court Observation: “When it comes to the consequences of misbranding, the same has been provided under both the enactments, and there is inconsistency in the enactments as regards the penal consequences of misbranding…. Thus, in a case where after coming into force of Section 52 of the FSSA, if an act of misbranding is committed by anyone, which is an offence punishable under Section 16 of PFA and which attracts penalty under Section 52 of the FSSA, Section 52 of the FSSA will override the provisions of PFA.,”

Previous Posts

AP High Court overturns a troubling conviction under the NDPS Act, stating that it was unfair to place the burden on the accused to prove they did not own the cultivated land

High Court Grants Bail to Two Individuals, While One Faces Denial in Rahul Solanki Murder Case Related to Delhi Riots

Delhi High Court Clarifies that Contempt for ‘Wilful’ Disobedience Excludes Casual or Bona Fide Acts and Does Not Encompass Negligent Actions

Mandatory Notice Under Municipalities Act Waived in Title Declaration and Permanent Injunction Suit Against Town Municipal Council: Karnataka High Court

If there’s a delay in carrying out a detention order without a clear explanation, the Jammu and Kashmir High Court suggests it casts doubt on whether the detaining authority was genuinely satisfied

Keywords

The Supreme Court asserts, Food Safety and Standards Act, Prevention of Food Adulteration Act