https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126889 Criminal prosecution for alleged food adulteration could not rest on a public analyst's report obtained through an unprescribed DGHS method, because the statutory scheme required a validated method of analysis before criminal liability could be founded. The allegation of adulteration also failed where no tolerance limit had then been prescribed for pesticide residue in sweetened carbonated water, and the later insertion of such a limit showed that trace residue was not automatically adulterative. The directors could not be proceeded against on the complaint as framed because there were no specific averments that they were in charge of, and responsible for, the company's business. en-us Sat, 18 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 10 May 2013 12:15:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126889 Criminal prosecution for alleged food adulteration could not rest on a public analyst's report obtained through an unprescribed DGHS method, because the statutory scheme required a validated method of analysis before criminal liability could be founded. The allegation of adulteration also failed where no tolerance limit had then been prescribed for pesticide residue in sweetened carbonated water, and the later insertion of such a limit showed that trace residue was not automatically adulterative. The directors could not be proceeded against on the complaint as framed because there were no specific averments that they were in charge of, and responsible for, the company's business. Case-Laws Companies Law Sat, 18 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126889