2016 (8) TMI 1613 - SC - Indian Laws

Supreme Court orders stricter penalties for milk adulteration with hazardous substances violating fundamental rights

Swami Achyutanand Tirth & Ors. Versus Union of India & Ors.

SC held that milk adulteration with hazardous substances like urea, detergent, and caustic soda violates Article 21 fundamental rights. Court directed ... Failure to take effective measures for combating the adulteration of milk with hazardous substance like urea, detergent, refined oil, caustic soda, etc. which adversely affects the consumers’ health and seek appropriate direction - violation of fundamental rights of the petitioners and public at large guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India - HELD THAT:- Considering the seriousness of the offence and referring to the amendment to Section 272 Indian Penal Code made by States of Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal and Odisha, wherein the punishment for adulteration of food and products is enhanced to imprisonment for life and also fine, by order dated 05.12.2013, this Court observed that “similar amendments are to be made in other states as well.” The same direction was reiterated by this Court vide order dated 30.01.2014 and this Court also directed Union of India to consider bringing in suitable amendments to FSS Act. On 13.03.2014, counsel appearing for the Union of India produced a letter dated 12.03.2014 of the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare wherein it has been stated that under the chairmanship of the Chairman of FSSAI, it has been decided to seek approval of the Government for initiating the process of amendment of the Food Safety and Standards Act 2006 in the light of the observations made by this Court. Vide order dated 11.11.2014, this Court observed that Union of India and State Governments must come out with suitable amendments in the Act or with a new legislation to stop adulteration and production of synthetic milk which is consumed by the infants/children and by the public at large. Since in India traditionally infants/children are fed milk, adulteration of milk and its products is a concern and stringent measures need to be taken to combat it. The consumption of adulterated milk and adulterated milk products is hazardous to human health. As directed by this Court by order dated 10.12.2014, it will be in order that the Union of India come up with suitable amendments in the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 and the respondent-Union of India shall also make penal provisions at par with the provisions contained in the State amendments. It will be in order, if the Union of India considers making suitable amendments in the penal provisions at par with the provisions contained in the State amendments to the Indian Penal Code. It is also desirable that Union of India revisits the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 to revise the punishment for adulteration making it more deterrent in cases where the adulterant can have an adverse impact on health. Conclusion - Union of India and the State Governments shall take appropriate steps to implement Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 in a more effective manner. The respondent-Union of India shall take up the matter seriously and come up with all possible amendments in the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006. Petition disposed off. The legal judgment addresses the issue of milk adulteration in India and the failure of state governments and the Union of India to effectively combat this problem. The petitioners, residents of various states, filed a writ petition in public interest, highlighting the health risks posed by adulterated milk and seeking directions for corrective measures.1. Issues Presented and ConsideredThe core legal questions considered in this judgment are:Whether the state governments and the Union of India have failed to take effective measures to prevent the sale of adulterated milk.Whether the current legislative framework, particularly the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 (FSS Act), is adequate to address the issue of milk adulteration.What additional measures or amendments are necessary to ensure the safety and purity of milk and milk productsRs.Whether the penal provisions for food adulteration need to be strengthened to deter such offenses.2. Issue-Wise Detailed AnalysisRelevant Legal Framework and PrecedentsThe primary legal framework governing food safety in India is the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, which consolidates laws related to food safety and establishes the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI). The Act aims to ensure the availability of safe and wholesome food for human consumption. It mandates licensing and registration of food businesses, sets standards for food safety, and prescribes penalties for violations.Court's Interpretation and ReasoningThe Court emphasized the importance of the FSS Act in regulating food safety and noted that the Act provides a comprehensive framework for addressing food adulteration. The Court acknowledged the legislative efforts made by the Union of India but highlighted the need for more stringent implementation and enforcement of the Act's provisions.Key Evidence and FindingsThe petitioners relied on a report by the FSSAI, which revealed that a significant percentage of milk samples across various states were adulterated. The report highlighted the presence of hazardous substances like urea, detergent, and refined oil in milk, posing serious health risks. The Court also considered affidavits filed by state governments detailing the actions taken under the FSS Act, such as prosecutions and inspections.Application of Law to FactsThe Court applied the provisions of the FSS Act to the facts presented, noting that the Act's implementation was inconsistent across states. The Court found that despite the legislative framework, the enforcement of food safety standards was inadequate, leading to widespread milk adulteration.Treatment of Competing ArgumentsThe Court considered the arguments of the petitioners regarding the inadequacy of current measures and the need for stricter penalties. It also evaluated the responses of state governments and the Union of India, which claimed compliance with the FSS Act. The Court found merit in the petitioners' concerns and emphasized the need for enhanced enforcement and amendments to the Act.ConclusionsThe Court concluded that the existing legal framework under the FSS Act is comprehensive but requires more effective implementation. It recognized the need for amendments to strengthen penal provisions and enhance deterrence against food adulteration.3. Significant HoldingsThe Court issued several significant directions to address the issue of milk adulteration:The Union of India and state governments must implement the FSS Act more effectively.States should inform dairy operators and retailers about stringent actions for chemical adulteration.State Food Safety Authorities should identify high-risk areas and conduct frequent inspections.Laboratories must be adequately equipped and accredited for precise testing.Special measures, including mobile food testing vans, should be used for spot testing.Periodic national and state-level surveys should be conducted to monitor adulteration.State-level and district-level committees should be established to review anti-adulteration efforts.Public awareness campaigns should be conducted to educate consumers about the risks of adulteration.A complaint mechanism should be established to address corruption and unethical practices.The Court reiterated the need for legislative amendments to the FSS Act and penal provisions to align with state amendments and make them more deterrent. The judgment underscores the importance of safeguarding public health and ensuring the availability of safe milk and milk products.