https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192657 Under section 20(1) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, as it stood before amendment, the State Government or local authority could validly issue a general authorisation empowering a person to grant written consent for prosecutions without linking that authorisation to a specified individual offence. The expression "in this behalf" was read as referring to the power to grant consent for prosecutions under the Act, and the provision was treated as permitting a practical general delegation consistent with the statutory purpose. The later amendment was viewed as clarificatory. The challenge to the prosecution on this ground failed, and the conviction and sentence remained undisturbed. en-us Tue, 18 Sep 1973 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 09 Jun 2017 17:35:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192657 Under section 20(1) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, as it stood before amendment, the State Government or local authority could validly issue a general authorisation empowering a person to grant written consent for prosecutions without linking that authorisation to a specified individual offence. The expression "in this behalf" was read as referring to the power to grant consent for prosecutions under the Act, and the provision was treated as permitting a practical general delegation consistent with the statutory purpose. The later amendment was viewed as clarificatory. The challenge to the prosecution on this ground failed, and the conviction and sentence remained undisturbed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 18 Sep 1973 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192657