SC adjourns hearing of soft drinks case for two weeks

New Delhi, Mar 20 (UNI) The Supreme Court today granted two weeks time to the petitioner, seeking directions to soft drinks companies- Pepsi and Coke- to display their ingredients on the bottles, to file an affidavit explaining why the bill pending in Parliament does not cover the issue raised in the present petition.

A bench comprising Mrs Justice Ruma Pal and Mr Justice Dalveer Bhandari adjourned the hearing of the petition filed by Centre for Public Interest Litigation for two weeks.

The court also granted two weeks time to the Centre as well as soft drink majors to respond to the affidavit of the petitioner.

Earlier, senior counsel K K Venugopal appearing for Pepsi informed the court that a bill seeking to amend the prevention of Food Adulteration Act suitably, is already pending with the Select Committee of the Parliament and there is no need to entertain this petition as the bill covers the issue raised in the petition.

Advocate Mr Prashant Bhushan appearing for the petitioner, however, contended that the bill was concerned only with the quantity of pesticides while the present case was concerned with additives like acids which are more harmful to human body than pesticides which the bill does not cover.

''Please do not involve us in what is essentially a legislative action,'' Justice Ruma Pal remarked when Advocate Bhushan contented that these additives and preservatives were more harmful than tobacco.

The court was earlier inclined to dismiss the petition on the ground that all the issue raised in the petition were subject matter of the bill already pending. The petitioner, however, referred to the WHO report confirming that soft drinks add to obesity especially among children.

The court also noted that this court is not inclined to embark upon an inquiry unless and until the soft drink majors transgressed the scientific standard laid on the basis of expert committee opinions. It observed that the case of the petitioner, did not include the fact that these soft drink majors were violating the said standard.

The petitioner's counsel, however, pleaded that his case does indicate that the soft drink companies were transgressing the scientific standards and permissible limit by adding acids and other chemical in their products.

They claimed that till date soft drink majors do not display the contents and their percentage in their products whereas it is the legal right of the consumer to know what he or she is consuming.

UNI AKS SC PR RS1405