Wrongly Convicted Database Record

 

Go to Database Search Page

Go to  Database Index Page

K. D. Yadav

 

Charge:

Food Purity violation (Food and Drug laws)

Sentence:

Years Imprisoned:

Year Crime:

1993

Year Convicted:

2003

Year Cleared:

2012

U.S. State or Country of Crime:

India

County or Region of Crime:

City of Crime:

Ghaziabad

Result:

Judicially Exonerated

Summary of Case:

"Raja Ram Seth & Sons and K D Yadav were co-defendants convicted in 2003 of selling adulterated double-toned milk sold on June 19, 1993 in a store in Kamia Nagar, India. Raja Ram Seth & Sons was the milk dealer, and K.D. Yadav was the liable representative (nominee) of the milk packaging firm of Amrit Foods (of Ghaziabad, India). The defendants were convicted under the Food & Adulteration Act based on a lab test of milk samples that found the "milk solid not fat" was 8.4% when the legal requirement was a minimum of 9%. A second test performed at the request of the defendants found the "milk sold not fat" was 9.8%. The second report also found that the "milk fat" content was 0.2%, which was less than the minimum prescribed content of 1.5%. The defendant's asserted that the samples were not representative because there was too much variation between them. However, 10 years after they were charged they were convicted in a magisterial court. Their appeal was denied by the Sessions Court in 2005, and they appealed to the High Court in New Delhi. On October 12, 2012 the High Court quashed the defendant's convictions on the basis of the "sharp and substantive variation" between the test results from the two samples. The High Court's ruling by Justice Manmohan stated, "If the variation in the two reports is substantial enough, the public analyst's report can certainly be looked into to establish this variation so as to support the contention of the petitioner that the sample was not representative. ... We find that the variation, as indicated above, is more than 0.3 per cent. Therefore, on the facts of the present case, it can be said that the variation is beyond the acceptable range and would clearly imply that the samples were not representative. In view of this finding and in the background of the law which is well settled, no conviction can be sustained." 19 years after the defendant's were charged and 10 years after they were convicted, their convictions were set-aside."

Conviction Caused By:

Innocence Proved By:

"On October 12, 2012 the High Court quashed the defendant's convictions on the basis of the "sharp and substantive variation" between the test results from the two samples."

Defendant Aided By:

Compensation Awarded:

Was Perpetrator Identified?

Age When Imprisoned:

Age When Released:

Sex:

Male

Skin/Ethnicity:

Information Source 1:

"HC quashes conviction in 19-year-old milk adulteration case, Staff writers, Business Standard, October 28, 2012"

Information Location 1:

http://www.business-standard.com/generalnews/news/hc-quashes-conviction-in-19-year-old-milk-adulteration-case/73277/

Information Source 2:

"HC quashes conviction in 19-year-old milk adulteration case, Staff writers, Zeenews.com, October 28, 2012"

Information Location 2:

http://zeenews.india.com/news/delhi/hc-quashes-conviction-in-19-year-old-milk-adulteration-case_808007.html

Information Source 3:

Information Location 3:

Information Source 4:

Information Location 4:

Information Source 5:

Information Location 5:

Book About Case:

Book Information:

Book About Case (2):

Book Information (2):

Movie About Case:

Comments About Case:

Innocents Database Created and Maintained by Hans Sherrer innocents@forejustice.org

Hosted on forejustice.org and mirrored on justicedenied.org .