FOOD ADULTERATION LAWS

AND CONSUMER RIGHTS

PRESENTED BY:
SANJIVAN CHAKRABORTY
SM0116038
 INTRODUCTION:
• Method used by producers to increase
quantity for increase in profits.
• Adulterants are inferior in quality and is
harmful for consumption.
• Safe food a fundamental to all
consumers recognizes by the FAO and
the WHO.
 FOOD ADULTERATION
• Addition or removal of substances to increase the profit.
• All nutrients are sacked. Places of production are often
contaminated.
• Substances like metanil yellow, melamine, etc are used as
adulterants.
• Water treatment plants- chlorine is used for treatment of water
to remove impurities.
• However this process may not kill some enteric and parasitic
organism. Which cause many diseases.
• Even carbonated beverages are not completely safe.
 THREAT TO CONSUMERS:
• Adulterated milk products.
• In 2007, in America samples of wheat gluten mixed with
melamine, presumably to produce artificially inflated results
from common tests for protein contents were discovered in
many U.S. pet food brands, as well as in human food supply. The
adulterated gluten was found to have come from China, and U.S.
authorities concluded that its origin was the Xuzhou Anying
Biologic Technology Development Company, a Xuzhou, China
based company.
• Again in 2008, significant portion of China’s milk supply were
found to have adulterated by melamine, infant formula produced
from melamine-tainted milk killed at least six children and
harmed thousands of others.
 INCIDENTS:
• Indian context in 2012, a study was conducted by the Food Safety
Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) across 33 states found that
milk in India is adulterated with detergents, fat and even urea, as
well as diluted with water. Of the 1791 random samples from 33
states, just 31.5% of the samples tested i.e. 565 conformed to the
FSSAI’s standards, while the rest i.e. 1226 or 68.4% tested failed
the test.
 MOTHER DAIRY CASE:
• In 2014 the deputy manager of a well known dairy company
‘Mother Dairy’ was given imprisonment for six months by the
Delhi High court for adulteration of milk in a hotel in 2006. He
also had to pay of sum of Rs. 10000 imposed by the Additional
Chief Metropolitan Magistrate.
• The court also convicted and imposed a fine of Rs one lakh on
Gujarat Corporation Milk Marketing Federation Ltd.
• JUDGEMENT: Dr Kallol Kumar Pramanik is sentenced to undergo
simple imprisonment for a period of six months as well as pay
fine of Rs 10,000 and M/s Gujarat Cooperation Milk Marketing
Federation Ltd is sentenced to pay fine of Rs 1 lakh for the
offence punishable under the Prevention of Food Adulteration
Act.
• Pramanik was looking after day-to-day business of Mother Dairy,
which had supplied the food item to Gujarat Cooperation Milk
Marketing Federation. The federation had further supplied the
food item to one Anand Enterprises which had sent that product
to the hotel.
• Raid was conducted by the food inspector at the hotel on June 3,
2006 during which it was found that its manager was conducting
the business of various food items including low fat cream. The
inspector collected the sample of the food item. Public analyst
found that the sample was adulterated because the milk fat was
found to be less than the minimum prescribed standard of 25 per
cent.
 REGULATION RELATED INFORMATION:
• In the consumer protection regime, here are three legal
instruments normally applied. They are the criminal law
instrument, civil law instrument and administrative law
instrument.
• The criminal law instrument involves the state involvement in
enforcing the law.
• In consumer protection, the state involvement can be seen when
there is a market failure to protect consumers.
• This criminal law instrument is used in all food legislation, except
Indonesia. In Indonesia, Act No 7 of 1996 on Food provides for
criminal penalties as well as civil remedies. The Act allows
consumers whose health has been affected by consumption of
unsafe food claim damages from the producer.