Adulterated food and saving provisions: conviction sustained, pending prosecution preserved after repeal, and statutory provisos not proved.

Food sold as an article represented of a particular quality is adulterated where its substance contains foreign fat, falls below the represented nature or quality, or is otherwise prejudicial to the purchaser, and the conviction was sustained on that basis. Repeal of the municipal statute during the pending prosecution did not terminate the case, because the saving provision preserved the proceedings and no retrial was required; the conviction was only aligned with the corresponding provisions of the earlier enactment. The accused could not invoke the statutory provisos without proving the facts that attracted them, so the claimed protection failed. The appeal therefore failed on the merits and the sentence remained undisturbed.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the sample puri fried in ghee adulterated with foreign fat constituted adulterated food within the meaning of the municipal law; (ii) Whether the repeal of the old municipal act during the pendency of the prosecution caused the proceedings to lapse or required a retrial under the new act; (iii) Whether the accused could claim the benefit of the statutory provisos without proving the conditions attracting them.

Issue (i): Whether the sample puri fried in ghee adulterated with foreign fat constituted adulterated food within the meaning of the municipal law.

Analysis: The statutory definition of adulteration for food was broad enough to cover food that contained a substance prejudicial to the purchaser or consumer, diminished food value or nutritive properties, or was not of the nature, substance or quality represented. The evidence showed that the article sold as puri fried in ghee in fact contained ghee adulterated with foreign fat, and the court treated the sample as falling within the mischief of the definition. The absence of a specific standard for puri did not defeat the prosecution where the ghee component was shown to be adulterated and the article sold was not the article represented to the purchaser.

Conclusion: Yes. The sample puri was adulterated food and the conviction could be sustained on that footing.

Issue (ii): Whether the repeal of the old municipal act during the pendency of the prosecution caused the proceedings to lapse or required a retrial under the new act.

Analysis: The saving provision in the Bengal General Clauses Act preserved the pending prosecution notwithstanding repeal. The old and new enactments dealt with the same offence structure and the accused suffered no prejudice merely because conviction was recorded under the new act while the prosecution had commenced under the old act. The court held that the proper course was only to align the conviction with the old enactment, not to terminate the prosecution or direct a retrial.

Conclusion: No. The proceedings did not lapse and no retrial was required.

Issue (iii): Whether the accused could claim the benefit of the statutory provisos without proving the conditions attracting them.

Analysis: The provisos were treated as a special defence. The burden of establishing facts bringing the case within those provisos lay on the accused, not on the prosecution to disprove them in the first instance. The record did not establish any circumstance that would attract the provisos.

Conclusion: The accused were not entitled to the protection of the provisos.

Final Conclusion: The appeal failed on the merits, the conviction was only corrected to the corresponding provisions of the old municipal act, and the sentences were left undisturbed.

Ratio Decidendi: Food sold as an article represented to be of a particular quality is adulterated when the ingredient forming its substance fails the statutory standard or renders the article not of the nature, substance or quality represented, and a repeal does not terminate a pending prosecution where the saving law preserves it.

---