The Kerala High Court quashed legal proceedings against Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages related to alleged violations concerning the declaration of sale price on packaged water labels. The court found that the charges did not substantiate a criminal offense, leading to the dismissal. This decision emphasizes the need for clarity in regulatory enforcement regarding product.
The Kerala High Court quashed criminal proceedings against Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages concerning an alleged violation of the printed sale price declaration on Kinley packaged drinking water.
The court granted the petition from Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages Pvt. Ltd. (the Petitioner), dismissing the criminal proceedings under the Legal Metrology Act, 2009, following an inspection at M/s Cinepolis.
Read Also: Delhi HC adds Starbucks, with McDonald’s and Sagar Ratna coming soon
Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan, in a single-bench ruling, stated,
“The Public Prosecutor also produced the bottle seized by the officer concerned. This Court perused the same. A perusal of the same would show that there is laser printing in the bottle. It cannot be said that the same is not legible and prominent.”
The petitioners’ counsel also referenced a news article, in which a Central Minister advocated for laser printing on water bottles.
The judge concluded,
“Since the printing is legible, I am of the considered opinion that the continuation of the prosecution against the petitioners is not necessary.”
Senior Advocates Grashious Kuriakose and K. Jaju Babu represented the Petitioners, while Senior Public Prosecutor Renjith T.R. acted for the Respondents. During an inspection at the trade premises of M/s Cinepolis in Cochin, a Senior Inspector noted alleged violations in the packaging and labeling of “Kinley with Added Minerals” bottled water.
The allegations focused on the absence of ‘legible and prominent declarations’ regarding the sale price and packaging date on the water bottles, which were said to contravene Sections 11(1)(b), 11(1)(e), and 18(1) of the Legal Metrology Act, along with Rule 9(1)(a) of the Legal Metrology (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 2011.
The Petitioners contended that these allegations were unfounded, asserting that the labels on the Kinley bottles were produced using laser printing methods, ensuring the necessary legibility and prominence. Rule 9(1)(a) specifies that each declaration must be “legible and prominent.”
The Petitioners presented the bottle for the court’s examination, arguing that the labelling was indeed clear.
The High Court determined that the printing on the bottles met the required legibility standard. The judge noted that the laser printing on the Kinley bottles was clear and visible, concluding that “the continuation of the prosecution against the petitioners is not necessary.”
Read Also: Orissa High Court Reverses GST Decision for Go Cool Outlets by Pioneer Bakers
The court also referenced a news article in which a Central Minister advocated for laser printing on water bottles. Citing this public endorsement, the Petitioners highlighted that their labeling methods conformed to the Minister’s recommendations.
Consequently, the court stated,
“Therefore, this Crl.M.C is allowed. All further proceedings against the petitioners alone on the files of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Ernakulam are quashed.”
Thus, the High Court granted the Petition.