Khaitan & Co Represented Alembic in Criminal Proceedings; Supreme Court Clears Charges Of Food Adulteration
Khaitan & Co successfully represented Alembic Limited, as the Supreme Court exonerated the pharmaceutical company in a criminal
Khaitan & Co Represented Alembic in Criminal Proceedings; Supreme Court Clears Charges Of Food Adulteration The Gujarat State government had accused the firm of wrongly labelling and misbranding the product as a table-top sweetener Khaitan & Co successfully represented Alembic Limited, as the Supreme Court exonerated the pharmaceutical company in a criminal proceeding under...
Khaitan & Co Represented Alembic in Criminal Proceedings; Supreme Court Clears Charges Of Food Adulteration
The Gujarat State government had accused the firm of wrongly labelling and misbranding the product as a table-top sweetener
Khaitan & Co successfully represented Alembic Limited, as the Supreme Court exonerated the pharmaceutical company in a criminal proceeding under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954.
In 2005, Alembic, known for its production and marketing of high-quality pharmaceutical products, had launched ‘Zero Calorie Sweetener’, a product that was seized for analysis by the food inspector. Upon examination, charges were framed against the company by the State of Gujarat for misbranding it.
In the trial court, Alembic and its representatives successfully defended against the charge and the firm was absolved.
However, the state government appealed before the Gujarat High Court and new allegations were raised against Alembic.
This time it was for non-compliance with the permissible limit of sucralose in the ‘Zero Calorie Sweetener’ (adulteration) and wrongly labelling and misbranding the product as a table-top sweetener under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955.
The court directed that the matter be remanded for re-trial de novo. Significantly, offences of adulteration and misbranding under the Food Act attract a term of not less than six months and a minimum Rs.1000 fine.
The apex court bench comprising Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan observed the fallacies in the reasoning adopted by the high court.
The judges held that in a criminal trial, the burden of proof could never be shifted on the accused. The State had to demonstrate if a complaint was raised against the ‘Zero Calorie Sweetener’ for adulteration. It had to prove that the product was wrongly labelled as a table-top sweetener. The technicalities of the law had to be strictly followed to give the accused the benefit of doubt in criminal proceedings.
The bench held that it would be futile to remand the matter for a re-trial, given the fatal flaws in the complaint. Since the complainants failed to show specific averments on ‘Zero Calorie Sweetener’ as adulterated, even then the charge would not be amended.
Senior advocate Dr. S. Muralidhar appeared for Alembic alongside the Khaitan & Co team comprising Ajay Bhargava (partner), Sahil Narang (partner), Dhritiman Roy (principal associate), Madhavam Sharma (principal associate) and Sania Abbasi (associate).