No implied quality standard for butter-milk under food rules; adulteration conviction failed absent an express prescribed standard.

The SC held that a conviction for adulteration could not stand where butter-milk had no expressly prescribed standard of quality under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955. The Rules fixed standards for certain milk products, but butter-milk was only defined by reference to its source process and no content standard, including solids-not-fat, was laid down for it. The Court declined to imply a standard that the rule-making authority had not enacted, so the prosecution failed for want of a breached prescribed standard and the conviction was set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether butter-milk had a prescribed standard of quality under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955 so as to sustain a conviction for adulteration.

Analysis: The statutory scheme treated an article of food as adulterated if its quality or purity fell below the prescribed standard. The Rules, framed under the Act, expressly fixed standards for several milk products, including milk, skimmed milk, butter and curd, but butter-milk was defined only as the product obtained after removal of butter from curd by churning or otherwise. No specific standard for its solids-not-fat content, or any other content standard, was prescribed for butter-milk. The Court declined to read into the definition a standard that the rule-making authority had not expressly imposed, and held that the prosecution was confined to the alleged failure to maintain a standard that did not exist for butter-milk.

Conclusion: The conviction could not be sustained, as butter-milk was not shown to be subject to any prescribed standard that was breached; the finding of guilt was therefore set aside in favour of the appellant.

Final Conclusion: A conviction for adulteration cannot be founded on an implied standard where the relevant food rules prescribe none for the article concerned.

Ratio Decidendi: In prosecutions for adulteration based on absence of prescribed quality, the Court cannot infer or import a standard for a food article unless the statute or rules expressly fix one for that article.

---