Foundation Of Case “Substantially Eroded”: Delhi High Court Quashes Maggi Noodles Prosecutions From 2015 Lead Content Row
The Bench held that once CFTRI's referral report, obtained on Supreme Court's directions, found lead content within permissible limits, prosecutions founded on superseded state lab reports cannot continue.
Justice Madhu Jain, Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has quashed criminal complaints instituted against retailers and other persons in the supply chain of Maggi Noodles over alleged excess lead content detected in 2015, holding that continuing the prosecutions despite the subsequent invalidation of the original test reports would amount to abuse of the process of court.
The Bench held that once the Supreme Court had directed fresh testing of Maggi Noodles samples through the Central Food Technological Research Institute (CFTRI), Mysore, a Referral Food Laboratory under the Food Safety and Standards Act, and that report found the lead content within permissible limits, the evidentiary value of the original Delhi Food Laboratory reports on which the present prosecutions rested stood substantially diluted.
A Single Judge Bench comprising Justice Madhu Jain observed, “Having regard to the subsequent orders passed by the Bombay High Court, the directions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court resulting in fresh analysis through CFTRI, the culmination of the proceedings before the NCDRC and the subsequent decisions rendered by the Himachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand High Courts, this Court is of the considered view that permitting the present prosecutions to continue would serve no useful purpose. The continuation of the complaints would merely compel the petitioners to undergo a protracted criminal trial despite the very foundation of the prosecution having substantially eroded”.
Advocate Rajesh Batra appeared for the petitioners and Digam Singh Dagar, APP appeared for the respondent.
In May 2015, Food Safety Officers of the Department of Food Safety, Government of NCT of Delhi, lifted samples of Maggi Noodles from retail outlets in Connaught Place as part of a nationwide sampling exercise. The Food Analyst, by reports dated June 2, 2015, opined that the samples were "unsafe" as the lead content in the masala tastemaker exceeded the prescribed limit of 2.5 ppm, with one sample also alleged to be misbranded over a "No Added MSG" label. None of the accused sought referral analysis within the prescribed period.
Following investigation tracing the supply chain through Dhingra Brothers to manufacturer Nestlé India Limited, the Commissioner, Department of Food Safety accorded consent under Section 30(2)(e) of the FSS Act, and complaints were instituted alleging violations of Sections 20, 26 and 27, punishable under Section 59 of the FSS Act.
The Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, by orders dated November 6, 2015 and January 11, 2016, took cognizance and issued summons. During the pendency of trial, the accused sought discharge, which was dismissed as not maintainable by orders dated November 30, 2022.
The petitioners thereafter approached the High Court under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashing of the complaints, summoning orders, and the orders dismissing discharge applications, relying on the intervening judgment of the Bombay High Court in Nestle India Limited v. FSSAI (2015), which had set aside the nationwide ban on Maggi Noodles after finding that the laboratories which tested the original samples were neither NABL-accredited nor notified under Section 43 of the FSS Act, and on subsequent Supreme Court proceedings directing fresh testing through CFTRI, which found the lead content within permissible limits, as well as the NCDRC's dismissal of the Union of India's consumer complaint on that basis.
The Court held that although the power under Section 482 CrPC must be exercised sparingly, criminal proceedings may be quashed where their continuation would amount to an abuse of process or where the prosecution's very foundation has ceased to exist. It found that the Delhi complaints arose from the same 2015 nationwide Maggi sampling exercise, and that the original Food Analyst's reports had been superseded by the CFTRI Referral Laboratory's findings, accepted by the Supreme Court and the NCDRC, which found lead levels within permissible limits. Rejecting the State's contention that the prosecutions should proceed independently, the Court held that it could not ignore these subsequent scientific findings and also relied on similar quashing orders passed by the Himachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand High Courts.
The Court accordingly, allowed the petitions and quashed the complaints, the summoning orders dated November 6, 2015 and January 11, 2016, and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom.
Cause Title: Dharmendra Hansraj Kotak & Ors. v. State of Delhi & Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2026:DHC:6343)
Appearances:
Petitioner: Rajesh Batra, Sonia Kukreja, Rohit Chandra and Sadhika Kochhar.
Respondent: Digam Singh Dagar, APP, for the State.