This is an appeal against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 22.6.1981 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sibsagar in C. R. Case No. 768 of 1979. 2. The case of the prosecution is that on 18.6.1979, the respondents sold and/or stored for sals Kashmiri Mukhbtlasa (Paan-ka-masala) sweetened artificially with saccharin. The sals or store for sale of paan-ka-masala sweetened with saccharin is prohibited under rules 44 (g) and 47 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, for short the "Rules". The sample of the paan-ka-masala was analysed by the Public Analyst, The report of the Public Analyst runs as follows : "Printed Label : Kashmiri Mukhbilas. This pan masala contains an admixture of saccharin. Physical : Brown Powder. Chemical : (1) Added colours : Absent. (2) Artificial Sweetening agent: Saccharin present and am of the opinion that the sample of panmasala artificially sweetened with saccharin." the learned Magistrate acquitted the petitioners of the charges U/s 16 r/w 7 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act on the ground that mixture of saccharin in the paan-ka-masala is permissible if the saccharin is within the standard prescribed under Appendix B to the Rules. 3. Mr. C. R. De, the learned public prosecutor, Assam, has submitted that mixture of saccharin is permissible only when the standard of paan-ka-masala is prescribed, and that the standard of paan-ka-masala has not been prescribed and, as such, the sate and/or store for sale of the mixture is not permissible. Mr. S. S. Sharma, the learned counsel for the respondents, has supported the findings of the learned Magistrate. 4. Rule 24 of the Rules runs : "Where an extraneous colouring matter has been added to any article of food, there shall be written on the label attached to any package of food so coloured a statement in capital letters as below : 'ARTIFICIALLY COLOURED' Provided that this rule shall not apply to cheese (all classess), ice cream, mixed ice-cream, ice-candy, icing sugar and gelatine desserts." 5.
Rule 44 (g) of the Rules provides that notwithstanding the provisions of rule 43 no person shall either by himself or by any servant or agent sell any article of food which contains any artificial sweetener, except where such artificial sweetener is permitted in accordance with the standards laid down in Appendix B. Rule 47 of the Rules reads : “Saccharin or any other artificial sweetener shall not be added to any article of food, except where the addition of such artificial sweetener is permitted in accordance with the standard laid down in Appendix 'B' and where any artificial sweetener is added to a food, the container of such food shall be labelled with an adhesive declaratory label which shall be in the form given below : "This------ contains an admixture of..... (name of food) (name of the artificial sweetener)". 6. The standards of saccharin is provided under clause A. 07.10 in Appendix B. A plain reading of rules 24, 44 (g) and 47 of the Rules together shows that the saccharin or any artificial sweetener can be added to any article of food provided that the standard of such an artificial sweetener is in accordance with the standards laid down in Appendix B. In other words, the sale and/or store for sale of paan-ka-masala does not per se make it an offence punishable under the Act, unless it is in breach of the standards prescribed. This view of mine finds support from the decisions in State of Maharastra V. Ranjitbhai, 1979 FAJ 231 : Mjs. Shivraj Tobacco Company V. State of Maharastra, 1982(1) FAC 313; Kailash V. State of Rajasthan,. 1985 FAJ 302; and Tliummalapudi Vankata V. State, 1986 EFR 181. In the above case, it has been held that addition of saccharin to paan-ka-masala as a sweetener is not entirely prohibited. Saccharin is a permissible artificial sweetener provided it is in accordance with the standards laid down in clause A. 07. 10 of the Appendix B. In other words, the mere presence of saccharin or addition of saccharin to 'suprai' or 'paan-ka-masala' does not per se make it an offence punishable under the Act, unless it is in breach of the standards prescribed. 8. In the light of above principle, let me now examine the case in hand.
10 of the Appendix B. In other words, the mere presence of saccharin or addition of saccharin to 'suprai' or 'paan-ka-masala' does not per se make it an offence punishable under the Act, unless it is in breach of the standards prescribed. 8. In the light of above principle, let me now examine the case in hand. The extract of the report of the Public Analyst above shows that the Public Analyst has not given any opinion whether the saccharin in the paan-ka-masala conforms to the standards laid down in Appendix B. There is also no evidence or material to show that the container or package of 'paan-ka-masala7 was not labelled with the declaration as provided under rule 24 of the Rules. In such a situation, there is no material to hold whether or not the saccharin was in accordance with the standards laid down in Appendix B. Therefore, the accused must get the benefit of it. In this view of the matter, the order of acquittal passed by the learned Aditional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sibsagar cannot be said to be illegal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.