The Legal Metrology Act, 2009, which establishes and enforces
the usual of weights and measures used within the industrial sector,
has lengthy been subjected to censure proudly owning to its harsh punitive
measures. In latest previous, Department of Consumer affairs
launched 
Stakeholder consultation on proposal of decriminalization of Legal
Metrology Act, 2009. It appears that the lengthy awaited respite
seemed ahead to by Directors working beneath duress and attempting to
dodge the noose of ‘criminality’, is a step nearer to
realisation.

A short historical past of the Legal Metrology Act

The commerce of products is and has been the idea of each financial system.
When individuals bartered items, they felt the necessity for uniformity which
led to the utilization of cash. As cash grew to become the standardised mode of
fee, the dual ideas of worth and amount started
crystallising. That was the time of localised markets, restricted
communication and technologically restricted promoting.
Traditional modes for measuring amount, like utilizing pebbles in
balances quickly proved inefficient as they supplied a large ambit for
commerce malpractices and affected buyer welfare. The want for a
standardisation of items of weights and measurement was thus felt
all through historical past. As the world grew smaller, economies
interconnected, and worldwide our bodies like International
Organisations for Legal Metrology got here into being, the federal government
enacted the Standards of Weights and Measures Act as early as 1956.
To sustain with the most recent commonplace of items, the federal government
regularised these Acts in 1977 and in 1985, recognising the necessity
for flexibility and a dynamic strategy to maintain up with the fast
modifications within the financial system. Globalisation introduced forth its personal record of
challenges because the industrialists grew to become shrewder and clients
remained naive lambs. The Legal Metrology Act of 2009, with all its
draconian measures as enacted to guard the susceptible celebration, the
buyer. However, for the reason that Act has been enacted, social media
platforms have boomed, and data creation and reception has
develop into easy. One put up is all it takes for dangerous promoting to
infect companies. The availability of innumerable substitutes
screams that compromising with high quality can lead to a sudden
demise. It is the period of multinational firms and outsourcing.
The iron fist of the Act, by maligning simply of 1 identify, can now
have an effect on the livelihoods of tens of millions throughout the globe. Therefore, the
time for change has come once more.

Challenges posed by the present Legislation

The Act because it exists in the present day consists of each prison and civil
measures of tackling malpractices inside its gambit. The prison
ramifications come up principally in circumstances of non-compounding of offences.
This has twin repercussions. Firstly, it raises
the usual of proof for proving the offence, therefore creating an
escape route for wrongdoers. Inability to show the fee
‘past cheap doubt’- particularly with the
important ingredient of mens rea  or prison
intention- hinders the compliance of legal guidelines.This on a micro degree is
dangerous to the rights of customers and on a macro degree, to the
Indian market by making a normal mistrust on the authenticity of
the products bought (suspicion on the printed date of producing,
date of import, weight claimed, marketed by, and so forth). Interestingly,
together with being too excessive a normal for affixing
legal responsibility, mens rea  additionally results in prosecution
in circumstances the place the deference needn’t essentially be
intentional. Secondly, the Act immediately impacts
ease of doing enterprise in India,which has been evidenced by the
oscillations in its definition of the which means of ‘particular person(s)
in command of the enterprise’, that’s, from together with the board
of administrators from lowering it to a single nominated director, for
making them criminally answerable for many of the offences beneath the
Act.

Proposed Amendments

Penalties and Preventive Measures

Recognising these challenges, the proposal goals at
decriminalising the provisions the place there needn’t be
any mens reaessentially concerned and the bigger
public needn’t be adversely affected. Thus, the proposal consists of
evaluation of the penalties within the present laws, between
sections 26 and 53 of the Act,which govern the manufacturing or
sale of non commonplace weights, tampering with licenses, quoting non
commonplace items, utilizing unverified weight measures, non manufacturing of
required paperwork, promoting non commonplace packaging in declaration
and amount, and so forth. A hiked penalty charge has been recommended as an
different within the vary ofOne lakh to Ten lakhs however with the
caveat of cancelling licenses. Thus, the proposal appears to be
conscious concerning the effectiveness of the penalties as a mode of
prevention, particularly as imprisonment is usually recommended to be accomplished away
with.Furthermore, to succeed in the identical finish of de-criminalisation,
sure offences reminiscent of tampering with or altering weights and
measures, giving false returns and sustaining false particulars,
have been recommended to be made ‘compoundable’.

Person in command of the conduct of enterprise

Targeting part 49 of the Act, which requires a director to be
nominated as a ‘particular person in-charge of conduct of
enterprise’, the proposals recommend that nominations be made on
the managerial degree as a substitute.The rationale behind that is that it
is Managers not Directors who’re in-charge of each day enterprise
operations. Section 49 of the 2009 Act had corrected the fallacy in
the 1976 Act, by offering for the nomination
of one Director or Partner (as opposed
to all within the latter) in opposition to whom
prison proceedings might be initiated. The proposal desires to go a
step additional and absolve the administrators of legal responsibility by placing
managers within the line of fireplace.

Selling above MRP – Section 36 (1) A

Finally, the proposal suggests the addition of part 36 (1) A
to focus on the sale of commodities above MRP.As but, it’s only
beneath part 32(3) of the
Legal Metrology (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 2011, as amended
in 2013, that promoting above MRP is ruled, which deems it a
compoundable offence punishable with a positive of Rs. Two Thousand in
case of a wholesaler or a retailer, and Rs. Five Thousand in case
of a producer or an importer. This has been strengthened by the
2018 modification whichholds the declaration of twin MRPs as a
contravention to legislation. If part 36 (1) A is launched, the
penalty will enhance such that it’s going to between Rs. Five Thousand
and Twenty Five for first time offenders however shall hike as much as a
minimal of Fifty Thousand and One Lakh for respective
repetitions.

Analysis and Conclusion

Hiked fines

The proposals sort out challenges posed by the Act with out
ignoring the goals sought to be fulfilled by it. Given that many
wrongdoers get away with their malpractices due to a better
commonplace of proof, strictly enforced financial penalties and
cancellation of license as measures of compliance can be, at
least, equally environment friendly as imprisonment and would additionally assist punish
them by hefty fines, stopping them from escaping utilizing the
stringent mens rea requirement. Incorporation of
such proposals would additionally scale back burden on courts as a result of with a
subsequent enhance in compoundable offences, offenders could plead
responsible and comply with pay positive, thereby eliminating the necessity for
utility of a judicial thoughts.

Cancellation of Licenses

Cancellation of licensesas a penalty for many of the provisions
is probably not proper strategy and have to be thought of fastidiously. With an
incentive for decriminalisation being discount on the burden on
courts, it appears absurd to introduce such a penalty as it might
truly reverse this profit by growing litigation. Moreover,
it might have a significant affect on stakeholders tied to the enterprise,
who, although harmless, would find yourself paying for one more’s
wrongs. A very good instance of that is that of companies having
multi-location presence, the place default without delay place may result in
cancellationof thelicenses for all of the items. This would definitely
be in opposition to the spirit of legislation and fairness and ease of doing enterprise
would additionally worsen.

Nomination of Managers

Regarding the second focal-point of the proposal, whereas
administrators don’t look into each day workings of an organization, they
ought to bear penalties for non efficiency as they get a share in
revenue as in comparison with managers who merely get a wage. Today,
for the reason that Board is concerned, the trade takes these compliances
critically. However if the onus of the cost is fully dropped on
the Manger, the aim of this modification could actually get
defeated.While all the board of administrators shouldn’t be
affected, there have to be some mechanism to make sure legal responsibility on their
half.

Introduction of Section 36(1)A

While decriminalisation is fascinating in some points, it isn’t
a ‘one measurement matches all’ mantra for enchancment. Some
offences are of such a nature that they require a harsher type of
atonement, specifically, imprisonment. Sale of commodities above the MRP
is a gross infringement of shopper rights and a blight in
transparency and clear enterprise operations. It is the Coronavirus
of day-to-day enterprise malpractices, that’s, extremely communicable
throughout sectors and enterprise constructions. Paying puny lakhs wouldn’t
be taken critically in swindles of crores. The Government should
ponder and strategise to introduce essential stringent punishments
to ban such practises.

In Sum

The digitalization scrutiny beneath the Act can also be a lot awaited
and its ignorance within the proposal has left many points unaddressed.
The authorities should take into account digitalization of all the course of
beneath the Act. To this regard, the longer term already appears brilliant.
With a latest notificationdated October 13, 2020, notifying the
improvement of a web-based system of nomination of administrators and
mandating on-line request for a similar, the federal government is
alreadydisplaying eagerness to enhance effectivity and transparency
by digitalisation.

Thus, whereas there are some free ends left to be tied, the
proposal looks as if a lightweight on the finish of the tunnel.

The content material of this text is meant to offer a normal
information to the subject material. Specialist recommendation ought to be sought
about your particular circumstances.