Section 275 BNS: Sale of Noxious Food or Drink
Section 275 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 punishes a person who sells, offers for sale, or exposes for sale as food or drink an article that has become noxious or is unfit for consumption, where the person knows or has reason to believe that the article is noxious.
Text of Section 275 BNS
275. Sale of noxious food or drink. Whoever sells, or offers or exposes for sale, as food or drink, any article which has been rendered or has become noxious, or is in a state unfit for food or drink, knowing or having reason to believe that the same is noxious as food or drink, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to five thousand rupees, or with both.
Meaning of Section 275 BNS
The provision focuses on the sale side of a food or drink transaction. It covers not only a completed sale but also an offer for sale or exposure for sale. The article must have been rendered or become noxious, or be in a condition unfit for food or drink.
The mental element is also important. The person must either know or have reason to believe that the article is noxious as food or drink. Mere presence of a defective article at a premises does not by itself state every ingredient of Section 275; the sale-related conduct and the required knowledge or reason to believe must also be established.
Essential Ingredients of the Offence
- There must be an article represented or dealt with as food or drink.
- The article must have been rendered or become noxious, or must be in a state unfit for food or drink.
- The accused must sell, offer for sale, or expose the article for sale as food or drink.
- The accused must know or have reason to believe that the article is noxious as food or drink.
Punishment under Section 275 BNS
A person convicted under Section 275 may be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term extending up to six months, or with a fine extending up to Rs. 5,000, or with both.
What Does "Noxious" or "Unfit for Food or Drink" Mean?
Section 275 uses the expressions "noxious" and "unfit for food or drink" without laying down a detailed statutory definition within the section itself. In ordinary legal application, the condition of the article and its suitability for human consumption would be assessed from the facts and evidence, including scientific or laboratory material where relevant.
Meaning of "Knowing or Having Reason to Believe"
The section does not impose liability solely because an article turns out to be defective. The prosecution must address the accused person's state of mind. Actual knowledge satisfies the provision, but the wording also extends to circumstances where the person has reason to believe that the food or drink is noxious.
Relevant circumstances may include the visible condition of the goods, expiry or storage circumstances, prior test reports, complaints, warnings, handling records, communications, or other facts capable of showing knowledge or reason to believe.
Difference Between Section 274 and Section 275 BNS
| Provision | Main Conduct | Mental Element |
|---|---|---|
| Section 274 BNS | Adulterating food or drink so as to make it noxious. | Intending to sell it, or knowing it is likely to be sold, as food or drink. |
| Section 275 BNS | Selling, offering or exposing for sale food or drink that is noxious or unfit. | Knowing or having reason to believe that it is noxious as food or drink. |
In simple terms, Section 274 primarily addresses the act of adulteration, while Section 275 addresses the sale or attempted sale of noxious or unfit food or drink.
Section 275 BNS and the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006
The Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 separately regulates the manufacture, storage, distribution, sale and import of food in India. It contains its own system of sampling, analysis, enforcement, penalties and offences.
| Provision | Subject |
|---|---|
| Section 275 BNS | Sale, offer or exposure for sale of noxious or unfit food or drink with knowledge or reason to believe. |
| Section 57, Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 | Penalty for possessing adulterant, with different limits depending on whether the adulterant is injurious to health. |
| Section 59, Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 | Punishment for unsafe food, with consequences that vary according to whether injury or death results. |
Important: Section 275 BNS and the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 are separate statutory provisions. Which provisions apply in a particular case depends on the allegations, the evidence, the food-safety framework invoked and the manner in which proceedings are instituted.
Evidence Commonly Relevant to a Section 275 Case
Depending on the facts, relevant evidence may include food samples, laboratory or analyst reports, invoices and sales records, photographs, storage conditions, expiry information, inspection records, prior complaints, warnings, communications, and evidence showing that the article was offered or exposed for sale.
Related BNS Provisions
- Section 271 - Negligent act likely to spread infection of disease dangerous to life
- Section 272 - Malignant act likely to spread infection of disease dangerous to life
- Section 273 - Disobedience to quarantine rule
- Section 274 - Adulteration of food or drink intended for sale
- Section 276 - Adulteration of drugs
- Section 277 - Sale of adulterated drugs
- Section 278 - Sale of drug as a different drug or preparation
- Section 279 - Fouling water of public spring or reservoir
- Section 280 - Making atmosphere noxious to health
Commencement of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 is Act No. 45 of 2023. Its provisions came into force on 1 July 2024, except the separately excluded provision of Section 106(2). Section 275 is therefore part of the operative BNS framework.
Practical Legal Point
A Section 275 allegation should be examined by identifying the exact article sold or offered for sale, determining whether it was in fact noxious or unfit for consumption, and evaluating the evidence that the accused knew or had reason to believe that condition existed. Where the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 is also invoked, its applicable provisions, regulations, sampling requirements and analyst material should be examined separately.