Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

(4) The main argument of Mr. Frank Anthony was that in the absence of any rule laying down the standards of quality or purity for Kaja, insect-infestation to the extent of 5.62% could not constitute adulteration when for certain articles of food infestation below a certain percentage was permitted. He also adopted the reasoning of Bawa Gurcharan Singh that unless on account of insect-infestation an article is unfit for human consumption it cannot be regarded to be adulterated under sub-clause (f) of clause (i) of section 2 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. It was as well urged that infestation involves presence of swarms of living insects. In other words presence of dead insects in an article of food was contended to be contrary to the notion of insect-infestation.

(11) The case of Wazir Chand Wadhawa related to sale of white grams (Channas), a sample of which on being analysed was reported by Shri Sudhamoy Roy, Public Analyst, to be adulterated on account of insect-infestation to the extent of 6.9%. The Public Analyst also reported presence of living insects in the specimen, The trial Magistrate convicted Wadhwa under section 7 read with section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. The appeal filed by him remained unsuccessful and he then filed a revision. At that stage V. D. Misra, J. examined Shri Prem Prakash Bhatnagar, who had succeeded Shri Sudhamoy Roy as Public Analyst. In his statement Shri Bhatnagar deposed that food-grains: found insect-infested up to 5 % were not being declared adulterated by him and it was only when the percentage was higher that these were reported to be adulterated. The learned Judge took the view that the presence of "6.9% of the Ghana grains containing insects will not make the sample in question to be insect infested". Obviously that case is no authority for the proposition that presence of dead insects in an article of food is inconsistent with the notion. of the article being insect-infested.

(14) The expression "insect-infested" was not defined in the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and has, therefore, to be given its ordinary dictionary meanings. The word "infest" appears to have been derived from the latin word "infestare" which meant to assail or molest. According to the Oxford English Dictionary (Volume V at page 259) the word "infest" means "To attack, assail, annoy, or trouble (a person or thing) in a persistent manner;" "to visit persistently or in large number for purposes of destruction or plunder;" "to swam in or about, so as to be troublesome". In the same Dictionary the word "infestation" is stated to mean: "The action of infesting, assailing, harassing, or persistently molesting". It is also mentioned that the word is now used especially for "insects which attack plants, grain, etc. in large swarms". Thus an article of food would be "insect-infested", if it has been attacked by insects in swarms or numbers. It however, seems to us that there is no justification for the view that insectinfestation would only continue so long as the insects continue to be alive. If an article of food is attacked by insects in large swarms or numbers and for some reason those insects die, the mere fact that the article of food has no longer living insects but las dead insects will not change its character of being insect-infested.

(17) In the cases against Dhan Raj, Jagan Nath, Paramjit Singh &nd Kundan Lal the prosecution evidence has yet to be recorded. In the case against Pradhan Singh it was, however, stated by Mr. Frank Anthony that the evidence, prosecution as well as defense, is complete.

(18) In none of the reports of the Public Analysts it was stated that the sample of Kaju was unfit for human consumption The reports merely mentioned the extent of insect-infestation found as a result of analysis. Except in the case of sale of Kaju pieces by Paramjit Singh the reports of the Public Analysts also did not make it clear whether any insects, dead or alive, were present.