HC refuses to let PepsiCo off in food adulteration case

AHMEDABAD: Food and beverage giant PepsiCo India Holdings Pvt Ltd will have to face trial in a Jamnagar court on charges of food adulteration over a 14-year-old complaint of fungus found in a bottle of Leher-Miranda.
Gujarat high court has refused to quash charges against the company and its nominee Hasmukh Mewada in the 2002 case and criticized the multinational for its efforts to drag the trial for over a decade.Food inspectors in Jamnagar had filed a complaint against the company after content of a 500-ml bottle of Leher-Miranda was found below standards prescribed under law. Even the public analyst's report had confirmed the presence of fungus growth in the bottle.
The chief judicial magistrate of Jamnagar decided to conduct a trial against the company and in December 2012, the court ordered for quick proceedings because the case was pending for a decade. PepsiCo rushed to the HC, which ordered a stay on the trial. The company raised question on intention of the authorities and procedures followed in filing the complaint by food inspectors.
However, after hearing the case, Justice A J Shastri refused to quash the proceedings on the ground that the company had remained silent for more than a decade on its statutory rights and evaded the main case in the trial court.
The HC observed that the issues of malafide intention on part of authorities and technical aspects can be dealt with by the trial court. The officers had filed the complaint after obtaining specific sanction and report of a public analyst confirming that there was an issue with quality standard of the product. The public analyst's report is the subject of a trial. Justice Shastri pulled up the company for resorting to evasive tactics. "Petitioners have shielded themselves from being prosecuted and have waited for an opportunity to thwart the case against them, which has been visualized by filing the petition after disposal of the earlier petition. This conduct is also worth to be taken note of while exercising inherent jurisdiction," the order reads.