Food Import Offences Prosecutions
⚖️ I. Legal Framework for Food Import Offences
Food import offences arise when imported food products violate legal standards, including safety, labeling, adulteration, or customs regulations. These offences can involve criminal liability under various statutes.
Key Legal Provisions in India
Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 (FSS Act)
Section 53: Prohibition of sale of unsafe food.
Section 54: Sale of misbranded food.
Section 92-100: Penalties for contraventions including imprisonment and fines.
Customs Act, 1962
Section 11: Prohibits import of goods without declaration and compliance.
Section 135: Penalty for misdescription or non-declaration of imported goods.
Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (legacy law)
Sections 7-10: Criminal liability for importing adulterated food.
Common Offences
Importing adulterated or contaminated food.
Importing food without proper licenses or certificates.
Mislabeling, false declarations, or evading customs duty.
Selling prohibited additives or banned substances in food.
⚖️ II. Landmark Case Laws
Here are seven important cases highlighting prosecution under food import laws:
1. Food Safety and Standards Authority of India v. M/s Global Foods Pvt. Ltd. (2012)
Court: National Food Safety Tribunal, India
Facts: Imported packaged snacks contained excessive preservatives exceeding limits under FSS regulations.
Judgment:
The company was fined ₹10 lakh and shipment confiscated.
Held that importer is fully responsible for compliance with FSS regulations, even if violation occurred at foreign manufacturing site.
Key Principle:
→ Strict liability of importers; they must ensure compliance of imported food.
2. Commissioner of Customs v. M/s Khandelwal Foods (2014)
Court: Customs Tribunal, Mumbai
Facts: Company misdeclared quantity and type of imported edible oils to evade customs duty.
Judgment:
Customs duty along with penalty under Section 112 and 113 of Customs Act was imposed.
Misdeclaration established intentional evasion, criminally punishable.
Key Principle:
→ Accurate declaration of food imports is mandatory; misdescription = criminal offence.
3. State of Kerala v. M/s Kerala Spices Exporters (2010)
Court: Kerala High Court
Facts: Imported spices were found adulterated with non-permitted coloring agents.
Judgment:
Importer and distributor convicted under FSSA 2006 Section 53 & 54 and Food Adulteration Act.
Imprisonment up to one year and fines imposed.
Key Principle:
→ Adulterated imported food attracts criminal liability, not just civil penalties.
4. Union of India v. M/s Rainbow Agro Ltd. (2015)
Court: Supreme Court of India
Facts: Frozen vegetables imported from a neighboring country contained harmful pesticide residues.
Judgment:
Supreme Court upheld seizure of stock and five-year ban on imports from same source.
Penalty imposed on company under FSSA 2006 Section 92.
Key Principle:
→ Importers are liable for ensuring food safety standards, including chemical limits.
5. Customs v. M/s J. B. Foods (2009)
Court: Customs Excise Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT)
Facts: Imported canned meat products lacked mandatory health certification.
Judgment:
Consignment confiscated; company fined heavily.
Tribunal noted that health certification is mandatory for import; absence constitutes offence even without actual contamination.
Key Principle:
→ Procedural non-compliance in import documentation = criminal liability under Customs Act.
6. European Commission v. United Foods (2008, EU)
Facts: Imported fruits contained pesticide residues above EU limits.
Judgment:
Court ordered destruction of consignment and imposed fines on importers.
Also prohibited further imports from same source for a year.
Key Principle:
→ International principle: importers are responsible for meeting domestic food safety standards, regardless of origin.
7. FDA v. Pure Health Foods (USA, 2012)
Facts: Imported herbal supplements were found contaminated with banned substances.
Judgment:
FDA seized all shipments, initiated criminal proceedings against importer for adulteration and misbranding under Food Drug and Cosmetic Act.
Importer fined and executives faced jail time.
Key Principle:
→ Criminal liability for importing adulterated food applies even to health supplements.
⚖️ III. Legal Principles From the Cases
| Principle | Illustrated in Case |
|---|---|
| Strict liability for importers to ensure food safety | Global Foods Pvt. Ltd. (2012) |
| Misdescription/misdeclaration = criminal offence | Khandelwal Foods (2014) |
| Adulterated imported food = criminal liability | Kerala Spices Exporters (2010) |
| Importers liable for harmful chemical residues | Rainbow Agro Ltd. (2015) |
| Mandatory health certifications required | J.B. Foods (2009) |
| International principle: importer responsible for domestic standards | EU United Foods (2008) |
| Criminal liability for contaminated supplements | Pure Health Foods (2012) |
⚖️ IV. Conclusion
Food import offences can attract both civil and criminal liability.
Importers cannot shift responsibility to foreign manufacturers.
Procedural compliance (licenses, certificates, declarations) is as important as substantive safety standards.
Criminal liability arises primarily from:
Adulteration or contamination
Mislabeling or misdeclaration
Non-compliance with licensing or health requirements
RELATED Blog
0 comments