Food under the PFA Act must be proved as human consumable; unreliable evidence and doubt defeated conviction.

Liability under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act depended on the prosecution proving beyond reasonable doubt that black til seeds sold by the accused were "food" intended for human consumption. Mens rea in the ordinary sense was not required, but the nature and intended use of the article still had to be shown clearly where doubt arose. The independent witness was found vague and unreliable, the evidence did not satisfactorily establish that black til seeds were ordinarily used as food, and the accused's explanation that they were kept for pooja created a real doubt. The alleged non-compliance with evidentiary safeguards under section 10(7) further weakened the prosecution case, so the conviction could not stand.

---

---

Issues: Whether the black til seeds sold by the accused were proved to be "food" meant for human consumption so as to attract liability under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, and whether the prosecution evidence was sufficiently reliable to sustain the conviction.

Analysis: The prosecution had to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the article sold was food within the meaning of the Act and was intended for human consumption. Mens rea in the ordinary sense was not required, but the nature and intended use of the article remained material where a genuine doubt arose. On the evidence, the independent witness was vague and unreliable, and his version did not satisfactorily corroborate the Food Inspector. The record also did not satisfactorily show that black til seeds were ordinarily used as food, while the accused's case that they were kept for pooja raised a real doubt. Non-compliance with the evidentiary safeguards reflected in section 10(7) further weakened the prosecution case.

Conclusion: The prosecution failed to prove with reliable evidence that the article sold was food meant for human consumption. The accused was entitled to the benefit of doubt and the conviction could not stand.

---