Madhya Pradesh High Court
Laxman Dhakad vs State Of Madhya Pradesh Through Kumari ... on 6 March, 2026
Author: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
Bench: G. S. Ahluwalia
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:8140
1 MSA-15-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE G. S. AHLUWALIA
ON THE 6 th OF MARCH, 2026
MISCELLANEOUS SECOND APPEAL No. 15 of 2025
LAXMAN DHAKAD
Versus
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH KUMARI REKHA SONI
Appearance:
Mr. Bhupendra Singh Dhakad - Advocate for appellant.
Mr. C.P. Singh - Govt. Advocate for respondent / State.
JUDGMENT
This Miscellaneous Second Appeal under Section 71(6) of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 (in short "FSSA") has been filed against the order dated 30/01/2025 passed by Food Safety Appellate Tribunal/3 rd District Judge, District Morena in MCA No. 27/2024, as well as order dated 26/02/2024 passed by Adjudicating Officer/Additional District Magistrate, District Morena in Case No. 27/2022/Food Safety.
2. The facts necessary for disposal of present appeal, in short, are that a complaint was filed against the appellant before Additional District Magistrate/Adjudicating Officer, District Morena under Sections 57 and 58 of FSSA. It was alleged that on 23/02/2021, an inspection was carried out by the Food Safety Officer along with her team and it was found that a Bolero pickup Jeep bearing registration No. MP-06-GA-2603 was standing outside the house and milk was being transferred to drums and milk containers.
Signature Not Verified Signed by: ALOK KUMAR Signing time: 09-03-2026 05:47:50 PMNEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:8140 2 MSA-15-2025 Appellant was directed to show the license to run the dairy operations, but he could not produce any license. During the search, a small plastic bucket filled with RM chemical, an opened steel container containing refined palm kernel oil, a plastic container filled with milk cream, and a measurement jar with empty bags of maltodextrin powder were found. It was alleged that appellant was found to be in possession of 200 liters of mixed milk filled in the drum placed outside the dairy, 10 kg of RM chemical filled in a small plastic bucket, refined palm kernel oil, and 7 kg of milk cream. Samples were collected. The Food Analyst found that the mixed milk and the milk cream were within the standards, but RM chemical and refined palm kernel oil were held to be substandard. Thereafter, the sample of mixed milk was sent to the Referral Laboratory, Mysore for re-examination, and it was again found to be within the standards. Accordingly, a complaint was filed before the Adjudicating Officer complaining violation of Sections 26(2)(v) and 31(2) of FSSA, as well as under Sections 57 and 58 of FSSA.
3. A show cause notice was issued to appellant, and in reply to the same, appellant stated that the whole process of investigation and sampling was unfair and is vitiated, therefore, prayed for quashment of the show cause notice.
4. Statement of Ku. Rekha Soni, Food Safety Officer, was recorded, and Adjudicating Officer, vide its order dated 26/02/2024, imposed a fine of Rs. 2,00,000/- under Section 57 of FSSA and Rs. 2,00,000/- under Section 58 of FSSA and a total fine of Rs. 4,00,000/- was imposed.
5. Being aggrieved by order dated 26/02/2024, appellant filed an Signature Not Verified Signed by: ALOK KUMAR Signing time: 09-03-2026 05:47:50 PM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:8140 3 MSA-15-2025 appeal before the Food Safety Appellate Tribunal/3 rd District Judge, District Morena. The appeal was partially allowed and penalty was reduced to Rs. 1,00,000/- under Section 57 FSSA and Rs. 50,000/- under Section 58 of FSSA.
6. Challenging the orders passed by the Tribunal as well as Adjudicating Officer, it is submitted by counsel for appellant that prosecution has failed to prove that any milk was seized from the possession of appellant.
7. Considered the submissions made by counsel for appellant.
8. Record of the Adjudicating Officer contains an affidavit of appellant Laxman Dhakad, in which he has admitted that on 23/02/2021, Food Safety Officer had collected samples of milk, cream, refined oil, etc., and after 23/02/2021, he stopped the business of selling milk, and at present, he is not in the business of selling milk and now he is surviving on agricultural activities. In view of aforesaid affidavit, it is clear that the samples were collected by the Food Safety Officer from the house of appellant on 23/02/2021 and appellant was in the dairy business. Why appellant had kept RM chemical and palm oil, etc., has not been disclosed by him.
9. So far as the fact that milk was found within norms is concerned, it is suffice to mention here that even from the complaint, it is clear that when the house was searched, milk was being unloaded from Bolero pickup No. MP-06-GA-2603 and was being filled in the drums which were kept outside the dairy. Thus, the presence of adulterants in the premises of appellant clearly indicates that they were kept for the purpose of adulteration in the Signature Not Verified Signed by: ALOK KUMAR Signing time: 09-03-2026 05:47:50 PM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:8140 4 MSA-15-2025 milk. Otherwise, there was no use for appellant to keep RM chemical and refined palm kernel oil.
10. Under these circumstances, specifically in the light of affidavit given by appellant, this Court is of considered opinion that no case is made out warranting interference.
11. At this stage, it is submitted by counsel for appellant that appellant is a poor person and, therefore, the penalty imposed by Food Safety Appellate Tribunal be reduced.
12. Adulteration of milk is serious because milk is generally consumed by infants and persons of old age. The Appellate Tribunal has already shown undue favor to appellant by reducing the penalty by a substantial margin. Any sympathetic view in a case of adulteration of food articles is detrimental not only to mankind but also to the very purpose of FSSA.
13. Under these circumstances, no case is made out warranting interference in the penalty imposed by the Appellate Tribunal.
14. Ex-consequenti, order dated 30/01/2025 passed by Food Safety Appellate Tribunal/3rd District Judge, District Morena in MCA No. 27/2024, as well as order dated 26/02/2024 passed by Adjudicating Officer/Additional District Magistrate, District Morena in Case No. 27/2022/Food Safety, are affirmed.
15. Appeal fails and is, hereby, dismissed.
(G. S. AHLUWALIA) JUDGE Signature Not Verified Signed by: ALOK KUMAR Signing time: 09-03-2026 05:47:50 PM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:8140 5 MSA-15-2025 AKS Signature Not Verified Signed by: ALOK KUMAR Signing time: 09-03-2026 05:47:50 PM