|
|
|
You can get e-magazine links on WhatsApp. Click here
|
|
|
|
|
|
Govt should think seriously about lacuna in FSS Act: Kerala HC
|
|
Monday, 14 October, 2024, 08 : 00 AM [IST]
|
|
Ashwani Maindola, New Delhi
|
The Kerala High Court has observed that the Union Government should think seriously about 'lacuna' in the FSS Act and Rules and make necessary amendments.
The HC has added that appropriate steps needs to be taken to remove the 'lacuna' while hearing an appeal filed hy PepsiCo
against the report of the Food Analyst in terms of sub-section (4) of section 46 of the FSS Act.
The Court observation came while quashing criminal proceedings against PepsiCo India Holdings Pvt. Ltd. (petitioner) in connection with a case filed by the Food Safety Department for alleged unsafe and misbranded food products based on a primary lab analysis.
The HC observed, "It is an admitted fact that the report of the referral laboratory is divergent from the report of the Food Analyst. If that be the case, in the light of Rule 3.1.1 of the FSS Rules, the prosecution against the petitioner is unsustainable, because the referral laboratory is not confirming the report of the Food Analyst, and instead of confirming, a divergent opinion is given by it."
The lacuna referred by the HC was a word used in the FSS Act with respect to findings of the lab analysis and hierarchy of labs wherein it was laid that the findings of referral lab shall be 'final' while the FSS Act doesn't mention that the referral lab findings shall 'supercede' primary lab analysis.
The word 'final', according to HC emphasises completion or conclusion and 'supercede' implies replacement.
And, in this case, HC observed that there were two different reports, of primary lab and referral lab.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|