Food Safety News – India updates – Nov-16

TAMILNADU

AP

COMPLAINT FILED AGAINST THE FAMOUS TIRUPATI LADDOO FOR UNHYGIENIC PREPARATION METHOD

 
The famous Laddu offered as prasadam in Tirupati is now being questioned for unhygienic preparation method.The FSSAI (Food Safety and Standards Authority of India) has asked the commissioner of…
The famous Laddu offered as prasadam in Tirupati is now being questioned for unhygienic preparation method.The FSSAI (Food Safety and Standards Authority of India) has asked the commissioner of Food safety to look into the certification and alleged violation of food safety norms by TTD in making of laddoos. This was followed by a petition filed by an activist who said he found nuts, bolts, key chain and Pan Parag in the laddoo. The laddoo will now be tested for quality and certification and other norms as specified by Food safety and standards act, 2006. This has created a sense of shock in many followers and worshippers as these tasty prasadams are a part of the Tirupati’s identity.
The licence act says only servants dressed in clean clothes can make or serve the laddoo. Murthy, who made the complaint, witnessed the process of making the laddoos in Tirupati.
‘The act states that such articles when exposed for sale, shall be kept in clean vessels or plates made of glass or metal covered with enamel or tin lining, placed in glass cases provided, if necessary, with a fly proof wire gauge at the top for ventilation and that no such articles shall be touched by hand and clean spoons or other accessories shall be used for serving them. But nothing of this is being practiced,” was the complaint registered by Murthy.
Tirupati laddoos are available in three types- Asthanam Laddu, Kalyanotsavam Laddu and Proktham Laddu. 200 people work together to get the laddoo prepared for the devotees and these people are a part of the Tirupati temple board. The Tirupati laddoo is one of the most sought sweets and it got its patent in the year 2009. These laddoos are made in large number, made of pure ghee but the complaint shows clearly that it is unsafe for consumption. The sweet goes through unhygienic processing method besides deficiencies at several stages including manufacture, storage, distribution and sale.
CHANDIGARH
Hotel owner held guilty of food sale without license

CHANDIGARH: A local court has held owner of Hotel City Plaza, Sector 7C, guilty of selling food without licence and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment till rising of the court and to pay fine of Rs 10,000 for the offence.The orders were issued by the court Of Chief Judicial Magistrate Akshdeep Mahajan. Accused Sham Sunder was booked for offence under sections 26(2) (iii), 31(1) of the Food Safety and Standards Act 2006, punishable under Section 63 of the Act, and his bail application was accepted.
Additional public prosecutor (APP) for the complainant contended that the premises of accused was inspected on August 17, 2015 and at that time, it was found that accused had been preparing and selling cooked food articles like pulses vegetables, Chapatti without having food licence for public sale.
Accused denied allegations and alleged false implication. Accused was given opportunity to lead evidence in defence however no evidence was led by the accused. APP contended that mere flaw in investigation should not form the basis for acquittal of the accused, and efforts should be made by the court to see that criminal justice was salvaged despite such defects in investigation. On the other hand, defence counsel contended that no joint raid as alleged was ever conducted and the accused has been falsely implicated in this case. As per the prosecution version, raiding team comprised officials of various departments i.e. Estate Office, fire and other departments.
Upon inspection, Bharat Kanojia FSO, food safety officer, inspected the business premises and he was challaned for selling food articles for human consumption without having a food licence.
A plea has been taken on behalf of convict that he is sole bread earner of his family and is not a previous convict, therefore, lenient view may kindly be taken. After hearing arguments the judgment read, “The convict is sentenced to undergo imprisonment till rising of the court and to pay fine of Rs 10,000 for offence punishable under Section 63 of the Act. On default of payment of fine, convict shall undergo imprisonment for seven days.”
Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s