The Hindu : Adulteration checks affected in 6 States

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Sunday, Dec 07, 2003

National

National

Adulteration checks affected in 6 States

By Mohamed Nazeer

KANNUR DEC. 6. Suspension of analysis work at Pune's Central Food Laboratory has affected food adulteration checks in Kerala, Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Jammu and Kashmir, Rajasthan and Delhi.

A circular issued by the Laboratory's Director on September 23 (No. CFL/258/03) informed the local health authorities (LHAs) in the States and local courts of the work suspension in November and December due to temporary shift of office for a year.

The circular sent to State Health Authorities (Health Services in the States) and Chief Judicial Magistrate Courts/Metropolitan Magistrate Courts in all the six States coming under the jurisdiction of the Pune laboratory, said the present laboratory building was being demolished for constructing a new one and hence the shift to a new premises. The courts were requested not to send samples for analysis during the period till alternative arrangements were made on the new premises. CFL's sample analysis is mandatory under Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954.

Sources said there were few cases of memos attached by courts last month as samples despatched to the CFL's old address had been returned undelivered.

The suspension of work at the CFL would leave prosecution proceedings in disarray because every step, after the LHAs initiate the proceedings, had to be done within a specified period. "Any delay will only favour the accused in the cases," they say.

Under the PFA Act, the LHA (District Food Inspector in grama panchayats and secretary/commissioner in municipality/corporation) are required to take a food sample in three parts and send one of them to the regional laboratory for analysis.

The LHA should launch prosecution against the person from whom the sample was taken within a month on receipt of the regional laboratory's report.

Under Section 13(2) of the Act the LHA should also forward a copy of the report to the accused. Within 10 days of the receipt of the copy, the accused should apply to the local court concerned for getting the other sample parts kept by the LHA analysed by the CFL. The LHA should forward the parts of the sample to the court within five days from the date of receipt of the court's requisition. The court despatches the sample to the Director of the CFL as early as possible.

"Does the Director of the CFL, Pune, have the powers to suspend food sample analysis for two months, especially when food adulteration is seen as a critical issue concerning people's health," they ask?

The CFL's analysis report is a deciding factor during trial as it supersedes all other reports, they say, adding that a person involved in a food adulteration case is considered an accused only after the CFL report confirms the charge against him.

There are four Central Food Laboratories in the country, each having jurisdiction over a group of States. Their jurisdictions are periodically fixed by the Central Government through a notification. Instead of temporarily suspending the analysis activities, the jurisdiction of the Pune laboratory could have been handed over to one of the other CFLs, they feel.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

National