Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 40069 (JHR)

PRAVEEN KUMAR v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

Cr.M.P./4107/2023 · 2025-12-08

Anil Kumar Choudhary

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

(2025:JHHC:36773) 1 Cr. M.P. No.4107 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No.4107 of 2023 ------ Praveen Kumar (Prop. Deepak Sweets), aged about 53 years, Son of Shiv Prasad Sah, Resident of Near Old Bus Stand, Chandandih, Latehar, P.O. & P.S.- Latehar, District- Latehar, Jharkhand (829206) … Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Food Safety Officer, Latehar … Opposite Parties ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Ashutosh Ranjan Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Prabhu D. Agrawal, Spl. P.P. ------ P R E S E N T HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY By the Court:- Heard the parties. 2. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with the prayer to quash the entire Complaint Case No.231 of 2020 instituted for the offence committed under Section 59 (i) read with Section 3 (1) (ZZ) (viii) of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 along with the order dated 10.09.2020 by which the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of the offence punishable under Section 3 (1) (ZZ) (viii) of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the relevant penal clause is Section 59 (i) of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 and Section 3 (1) (ZZ) of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 is a definition clause, which defines ‘unsafe food’, so, when a sense having (2025:JHHC:36773) 2 Cr. M.P. No.4107 of 2023 been taken in respect of a provision of law which is not a penal provision, the impugned order is not sustainable in law. 4. Learned Spl. P.P. appearing for the State fairly submits that Section 3 (1) (ZZ) (viii) of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 is not a penal provision of law. 5. Considering the aforesaid facts, the order dated 10.09.2020 passed in Complaint Case No.231 of 2020 being not sustainable in law, as the cognizance has been taken in respect of an offence which is a definition clause but not a penal provision of law; the same is quashed and set and aside and the matter is remitted to the court concerned to pass a fresh order in accordance with law. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi Dated the 08th of December, 2025 AFR/ Animesh Uploaded on- 11/12/2025