SC refuses bail in Food Adulteration Case; asks Lawyer asking bail if he will consume the food

SC refuses bail in Food Adulteration Case; asks Lawyer asking bail if he will consume the food
Credits - Live Law
Share This:
  • The SC observed that “Only in India we are liberal with the health concerns,” as it refused to consider pre-arrest bail pleas of two accused businessmen.
  • An FIR was lodged by the Food Safety department that said Prawar Goyal and Vineet Goyal have been using “non-edible golden offset colour” for polishing wheat at Neemuch.
  • A raid took place on December 3, 2020 and FSO of Neemuch seized a 1,20,620 kg of “sub-standard and misbranded polished wheat” valued at Rs. 27.74 Lakh.
  • Lawyer Puneet Jain argued for the anticipatory bail and the SC denied saying, “Mr Jain, answer this. Will you eat this adulterated wheat?”

The Supreme Court of India was seeing an Adulteration case lodged against two Madhya Pradesh-based businessmen accused of Good Adulteration.

A vacation bench comprising Justices Indira Banerjee and M R Shah was hearing the anticipatory bail applications of Prawar Goyal and Vineet Goyal of Neemuch district in Madhya Pradesh.

The SC observed that “Only in India we are liberal with the health concerns,” as it refused to consider pre-arrest bail pleas of two accused businessmen.

The lawyer appointed by the businessmen argued for the anticipatory bail in the food adulteration case. Lawyer Puneet Jain tried to convince the SC by starting that penal provisions relating to the offence of food adulteration are bailable ones and hence, the accused deserved anticipatory bail.

The Supreme Court responded in a way that baffled the Lawyer. It said that if the Lawyer and his Family were willing to consume what the Businessmen sold, the SC would consider allowing his plea for the anticipatory bail.

“Only in India we are liberal with health concerns,” Justice Shah said, adding, “Mr Jain, answer this. Will you eat this adulterated wheat?”

After the verbal and witty attack by the SC,  lawyer Puneet Jain took time to respond to it. The Supreme Court then clearly said that it was not inclined to give anticipatory bail in a case like this. As the bench was disinclined to consider the anticipatory bail plea, Jain decided to withdraw the same. 

The court asked Jain why it was difficult for him to answer such a basic question. “Or is it that let other people die? Why should we bother?”

The Case

  • In December, Prawar Goyal and Vineet Goyal, the businessmen from Madhya Pradesh’s Neemuch district were accused of adulterating Food,
  • An FIR was lodged by the Food Safety department that said the businessmen have been using “non-edible golden offset colour” for polishing wheat at the premises of Darshil Agro Industries situated in Village Kanawati at Neemuch,
  • A raid took place on December 3, 2020 and FSO of Neemuch seized a 1,20,620 kg of “sub-standard and misbranded polished wheat” valued at ₹ 27.74 lakh.

Not just the offence of Cheating but the two have also been booked under Section 272 (adulteration of food or drink intended for sale) and 273 (sale of noxious food or drink) of the IPC which jails them for a term of atleast six months or a maximum fine of Rs 1,000 or both.