K.N. Seth, J. - (1.) THE only question involved in these appeals is whether the country liquor is covered by the definition of 'food' within the meaning of that word under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (Act No. 37 of 1954) (hereinafter referred to as the Act).
(2.) THE Respondents were prosecuted on the charge that the country liquor recovered from their shops contained coal -tar dye, viz. sunset yellow, the Use of which is prohibited under the rules. The learned Magistrate has taken the view that country liquor is not food as defined in Section 2(v) of the Act and he accordingly acquitted the Respondents. Prior to the enforcement of the Act 37 of 1954 U.P. Pure Food Act, 1950, was in force in this State. Under Section 2(g) of that Act 'food' was defined to mean "any article of food or drink other than a drug water, wine, liquors, or other excise -able articles (intoxicants) used for human consumption...." This clearly indicates that wine liquors or other excisable articles (intoxicants) were specifically excluded from the definition of "food" under that Act. Under the Act "food" is defined as follows: 'Food' means any article used as food or drink for -human consumption other than drugs and water and includes - - (a) any article which ordinarily enters into, or is used in the composition or preparation of human food, and (b) any flavouring matter or condiments; Under this definition wine, liquors or Other excise able articles (intoxicants) have not been excluded from the definition of food. The U.P. Pure Food Act stands repealed by Section 25 of the Act. It must be presumed that the Parliament was conscious of the definition of "food" in the U.P. Pure Food Act. When the words "wipe, liquors or other excise able articles (intoxicants)" were excluded from the definition of "food" under the present Act, the legislative intent obviously was to make the definition of "food" more comprehensive. The view taken bf the learned: Magistrate is not based on any reasoning and does' not appear to be sound.
(3.) RULES 28, 29 and 30 framed under the Act indicate that use of coal -tar dyes is not permitted, in alcoholic drinks. The report of the Public Analyst, which has not been challenged, indicates that the sample of country liquor was coloured with a coal -tar dye, namely, sunset yellow F.G.F. The Respondents were, therefore; dearly guilty, Under Sections 7/16 of the Act and their acquittal must be set aside.;