IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, J.---This appeal by leave of the Court is directed against the judgment dated 31st March, 1994 whereby High Court of Sindh accepted Constitutional petition filed by respondents.
2. Precisely stating facts of the case are that the Food Inspectors of the appellants seized 3000 + 6000 = 9000 bottles of syrup Jam-e-Shireen a product produced/manufactured by the respondents on the stated allegation that the contents of the bottles contains articles injurious to the health. Subsequently respondents learnt that after getting analyzed the syrup of Jam-e- Shireen from Public Analyst appellants had only alleged that the word "flavour" has not been mentioned on the labels as per the requirement of Rule 7(b) of the West Pakistan Pure Food Rules, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as the "Rules"). As the respondents' organization was being harassed by publishing the News items in the newspapers in respect of its product Jam-e-Shireen and such action of the appellants' Inspectors was spreading panic in the mind of the general public and regular consumers, therefore, Constitutional petition was filed.
3. Learned High Court of Sindh accepted the Constitutional petition vide impugned judgment, as such Leave to Appeal was granted to interpret Rule 7 of the Rules in view of the contentions of appellants' counsel that A non-mentioning type of flavour on the label of the bottle of Jam-e- Shireen with the legend natural flavour or contains natural flavouring tantamotints to violation of Rule 7(b) of the Rules.
4. Mr. Abrar Hasan, Advocate Supreme Court appeared for appellants and Nawab Saeedullah Khan, Advocate Supreme Court represented the respondents.
5. Learned counsel for appellants contended that the label on the bottle of Jam-e-Shireen does not contain the legend natural flavour or contains natural flavouring therefore it would mean that by making addition of any flavouring compound natural flavour is achieved but the name of the compound so added is not mentioned on the label in order to disguise the consumers, as such, the respondent No,1 is responsible for violating Rule 7(b) of the Rules. He further argued that as per the contents of the label on the bottle, Jam-e-Shireen is made from distillate of pure natural ingredients and simultaneously the label also contains a statement that "suspended particles in syrup which are active ingredients released by the extracts and kept purposely as they are good for health so shake the bottle before use", therefore, according to him, if the syrup is manufactured from distillate pure food then it is not possible that simultaneously it would contain the suspended particles. Therefore, according to him besides the distillated natural ingredients some other articles/compound is also used and due to this reason on the label it is not mentioned whether it contains natural flavour or contains natural flavouring. And under the circumstances the Inspectors of the appellants rightly initiated action against them for violation of Rule 7(b) of the Rules but the learned High Court without looking into these aspects of the case issued the writ as a result whereof whole proceedings have been quashed.
6. Learned counsel for respondent No,1 contended that Jarn-e-Shireen is manufactured with the distilled ingredients of Food items mentioned on its label like Keora, Rose flowers, Sandal, Ushna, Khass, refined sugar, distilled acquas of herbs and is not adding any article of food .Of any flavouring compound, therefore, it was not necessary to inscribe on its label word natural flavour or contains natural flavouring. According to him if sub-rule (b) is read conjunctively with the opening part of Rule 7 it would make clear that non-mentioning of the word natural flavour or contains natural flavouring on the label is not necessary as the product of Jam-e-Shireen has been prepared with the pure natural ingredients noted hereinabove. He also stated that Public Analyst, Government of Sindh had not examined the contents of the syrup Jam-e-Shireen and in absence of such report it is not possible to hold that the syrup contains suspended particles of some of the compounds other than the ingredients of the syrup i,e, refined sugar etc.
7. The arguments put forward on behalf of appellants are bifurcated in two parts, that the respondent No,1 on the label of the syrup Jam-e-Shireen had not inscribed the name of flavouring compound on the label with the legend natural flavour or contains natural flavouring, therefore, Rule 7(b) of the Rules has been followed calling for action against the respondent under section 4 of the Pure Food Ordinance, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as the ("Ordinance") respondent is liable for action and the contents of the Syrup contains suspended particles which are other than the ingredients noted on the label of Jam-e-Shireen which mean that addition of any other article of Food has been made, therefore, prosecution of respondent No,1 was initiated. To deal with latter argument it would be necessary to go through the contents of the certificate of Public Analyst, according to which the sample is of non-genuine Jam-e-Shireen. Reason assigned for saying so is as follows : -- "Sample is pre-packed food. Sample label states that it is made from distilled Aqueors extracts of herbs Keora, role Sandal, Ushna, Chass which by definition comes with in purview of Natural flavour Rule 7(b). Sample does not mention the type of flavour in the manner prescribed in Rule 7(b). The sample contravenes the provision of Rule 7(b) of W.P.P. Food Rules, 1965." A perusal of above report suggests to hold that the contents of the bottle containing Jam-e- Shireen were not examined by Public Analyst, therefore, argument that it contains such suspended particles which are other than its ingredients inscribed on the label is not acceptable unless it has been stated in report that suspended particles do not tall within the definition of Food as provided by section 2(9) of the Ordinance, therefore, calls for action against respondent No,1.
Learned counsel for the appellants in furtherance of his argument stated that if Jam-e-Shreen has been made from the distillation of its ingredients i,e, sugar etc. Then presence of suspended articles would mean that the particles belong to some other compound which are not natural and have been illegally added in it. We could have accepted his this argument if the Public Analyst had opined that the suspended particles are of some different compound other than ingredients of the syrup on the basis of their actual analyses. But in absence of any such expert report merely on basis of presumptions no adverse inference can be drawn against respondent No, I. However, the competent authority even now is not debarred to carry out analyses of contents of bottle of Jam- e-Shireen Syrup to ascertain whether it contains pure natural ingredients as it has been inscribed on its label or it contain some other compound which does not fall within the definition of Food and on getting such report prosecution can be launched against respondent No,1 according to law.
8. As far as former argument is concerned it will be considered in view of section 4 of the Ordinance and Rule 7 of the Rules together. For convenience both the provisions are reproduced hereinbelow respectively:-- "4. Prohibition of mixing and selling mixed food.--(1) No person shall mix, colour, stain or powder or direct or permit any other person to mix, colour, stain or powder any food with any matter or ingredient:--
(a) in contravention of the prescribed rules; or
(b) so as to render the food injurious to health with intent that the same may be sold in that state.
(2) No person shall sell, offer, keep, or store any good so mixed, coloured, stained or powdered."
"7. Flavouring compounds in food.--The addition to any articles of food of any flavouring compound in contravention of the following clauses shall be deemed to be contravention within the meaning of section 4:
(a) No food shall contain any flavouring compounds which are by themselves toxic or contain as contaminates materials which are toxic.
(b) Any food which contains any natural flavouring compounds shall be labelled with the legend 'NATURAL FLAVOUR' or 'CONTAINS NATURAL FLAVOURING' provided that only those flavouring compounds which have been obtained from fruits or plants by extraction with suitable harmless solvents, by distillation by expression or by any other suitable process shall be considered as natural.
(c) Any food which contains any artificial 'flavouring compound shall be labelled with the legend 'ARTIFICIAL FLAVOUR' or 'IMMITATION FLAVOUR': Provided that where a food contains a mixture of both natural and artificial flavouring compounds it shall be labelled as 'ARTIFICIAL FLAVOUR': Provided further that those flavouring compounds which have been obtained by chemical synthesis shall' be considered as artificiats."
A perusal of section 4 of the Ordinance indicates that mixing and selling mixed food is prohibited under the prescribed Rules or such food, which is injurious.To health. With reference to facts of instant case Rule 7(b) of the Rules is relevant because according to Public Analyst sample of Jam- e-Shireen has been found non-genuine as -its label does not contain legend Of natural flavour or contains natural flavouring. As it has been noted that to attract provisions of section 4 of the Ordinance it is necessary to prima facie establish that in the food items such compound has been mixed which is prohibited being contrary to the prescribed rules or mixing of such compound in it has rendered it injurious for health and if these two factors exist then the prosecution can be launched successfully against an accused under the law. Therefore, to attract provisions of. Rule 7(b) of the Rules it is to he read conjunctively, with opening part of Rule 7 to find out whether subject food had addition of any component, which is injurious to health, or any compound has been added for achieving natural flavour or natural flavouring. But in absence of such compound in the food section 4 of the Ordinance read with Rule 7(b) of the Rules will not be attracted for launching prosecution against manufacturer of food or whatever the case may be. It may further be noted that ordinarily words and phrases implied into a statute are to be read as per their original/natural meanings with a view to achieve the object for which the law has been promulgated and if while interpreting a statute any word/phrase used therein is interpreted by adopting artificial meanings it would give rise to an ambiguity on account of which such law would not be understood in its real perspective causing ultimate injustice to concerned litigant. The controlling part of Rule 7 of the Rules manifestly makes it clear that to attract section 4 of the Ordinance it is necessary to establish that the food items contain an additional article of food used for flavouring and if the addition of such article has been made in the food then it is necessary that the label must contain the legend natural flavour or contains natural flavouring but if there is no addition of any article of food of any flavouring compound then it is not necessary to inscribe upon the label the legend "natural flavouring". With reference to case in hand it would have been appropriate if the Public Analyst in the report had said that besides its ingredients inscribed on the label some other article of food has been added for natural flavour or natural flavouring and added compound or article is injurious for the health then the appellants could have successfully established violation of section 4(a) and (b) of the Ordinance read with. Rule 7(b) of the Rules against respondent but. In absence of Analyser's Report merely for the reason that on the label the legend natural flavour or contains natural flavouring has not been mentioned would not be sufficient to call for the prosecution of respondent No, 1 . We fail to understand that if the appellant had received a credible information that Jam-e- Shireen is a non-genuine food item then why they did not analyse its contents instead of confining only to the extent of the label pasted on the bottle. Thus in absence of sufficient material available on record prima facie contravention of section 4(a) and (b) of the Ordinance and Rule 7(b) of the Rules is not established, therefore, under these circumstances learned High Court rightly issued writ in favour of respondent No,1 . For the foregoing reasons appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs.