Statutory defence for sale with written warranty protects a vendor who resells food in the same condition despite a bogus supplier.

A vendor who buys food with a written warranty, stores it properly, and resells it in the same condition can invoke the statutory defence under the Prevention of Food Adulteration framework. The defence is not defeated merely because the supplier is later alleged to be bogus or non-existent, if the transaction appeared regular and the vendor had no reason to suspect any defect. On the stated facts, the burden for the defence was treated as discharged, so the conviction and sentence could not stand.

---

---

Issues: Whether the accused was entitled to the statutory defence under Section 19(2) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act read with Rule 12A of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules when he purchased the article with a written warranty and resold it in the same condition, notwithstanding the allegation that the supplier was a bogus or non-existing firm.

Analysis: The defence under Section 19(2) is available where the vendor proves purchase from a manufacturer, distributor or dealer with a written warranty in the prescribed form, and that the article was properly stored and sold in the same state as purchased. The evidence showed that the appellant received the sealed article with a warranty bill and sold it without tampering or change in condition. The Court held that, on these facts, the appellant could not be expected to verify the internal correctness of the supplier's existence or licensing status when the transaction appeared regular on its face and the article was sold in the same condition.

Conclusion: The appellant had discharged the burden necessary to attract the statutory defence, and the conviction and sentence could not stand.

Ratio Decidendi: A vendor who purchases an article of food with a written warranty and resells it in the same condition is entitled to the defence under Section 19(2), and the defence is not defeated merely because the supplier is later found to be non-existent or bogus, if the vendor had no reason to suspect the defect in the transaction.

---