Authority: High Court of Uttarakhand, Nainital

Order Date: 18.06.2026

Case Overview

  • Parties: Appellant PepsiCo India Holdings Private Limited (and M/s Bikanerwala Food Products Pvt. Ltd.) vs Respondents State of Uttarakhand and another.
  • Background: On 08.06.2015 a Food Safety Officer inspected the shop of Mr. Shashi Bhushan Pant (M/s N.S. Enterprise) in Srinagar, Pauri Garhwal, purchased four packets of "Lahar Aloo Bhujia". One sample was sent to the Food Laboratory; the analyst labeled the product misbranded because the label contained the phrase "Maha Value".
  • Adjudicating Officer Action: The Additional District Magistrate, Garhwal issued notice, found the label non‑compliant with the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 and the 2011 Rules, and imposed a penalty of Rs.1.5 Lakhs on each appellant; the shopkeeper was exonerated.
  • Tribunal Proceedings: The appellants appealed to the Food Safety Appellate Tribunal, Dehradun. The Tribunal confirmed the penalty (judgment dated 31.05.2024).
  • Appellant Submissions: Argued that "Maha Value" merely indicates a value‑package quantity, complies with the Legal Metrology Act, 2009 and the Legal Metrology (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 2011, and does not constitute a false or misleading claim. Cited Supreme Court and High Court precedents (Bal Kishan Thapar, Parakh Foods, Sterling Agro, Glaxo India, earlier PepsiCo case) emphasizing that without a specific allegation of misleading information, a label cannot be deemed misbranded.
  • Public Analyst Report: Form B, Report No. 180/SDFTL/JUN/15‑PWL, dated 15.06.2015, stated the sample was misbranded under Section 3(1)(zf)(A)(i) of the FSS Act but provided no reasoning or indication of false/misleading information.
  • Legal Reasoning: The Tribunal placed the burden on the appellant to explain the meaning of "Maha Value"; the Court observed that the prosecution failed to prove any misleading statement, violating the statutory burden‑of‑proof requirement.

Final Outcome

  • The High Court allowed the appeal, setting aside both the Tribunal judgment dated 31.05.2024 and the Adjudicating Officer’s order dated 21.12.2018.
  • The Rs.1.5 Lakhs penalty imposed on PepsiCo India Holdings Private Limited and Bikanerwala Food Products Pvt. Ltd. was completely overturned.
  • No further penalty or directive was imposed on the respondents.

Topics: Food Safety, Labeling Regulations