Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + SC Companies Law - 2010 (12) TMI SC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2010 (12) TMI 1062 - SC - Companies LawOffenses by companies - In the absence of any prescribed and validated method of analysis under section 23(1A)(hh) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as "the 1954 Act"), could a prosecution have been launched against the appellants based on a report submitted by the public analyst using the method of the Directorate General of Health Services (D.G. H. S.)? Could a prosecution have been launched against the appellants in the absence of any validated method of analysis to ascertain the percentage of pesticide residue present in a carbonated beverage, which renders the report of the public analyst unreliable, particularly when it does not indicate that such percentage of the pesticide residue is injurious to health and, therefore, adulterated within the meaning of section 2(ia)(h) of the aforesaid Act? What is the effect of non-specification of the level of tolerance in respect of the presence of pesticide residue in sweetened carbonated water in the Table appended to rule 65(2) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as "the 1955 Rules")? What is the liability of the directors of a company which is said to have committed defaults within the meaning of section 17 of the 1954 Act, in the light of the decision of this court in S.M.S. Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Neeta Bhalla [2005 (9) TMI 304 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA], when they were neither in charge of nor responsible for the conduct of the business of the company?
|