Chapter IX - Offences and Penalties
Section 66
Section 66: offences by companies
Section 66 addresses responsibility when an offence under the FSS Act is committed by a company, including specified people responsible for the business.
On this page
Need advice on Section 66?
This article is for general information. Refer to the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 official text for the official provisions. If you need professional advice for your situation, contact Bizeneed.
Statutory text
Bare law
(1) Where an offence under this Act which has been committed by a company, every person who at the time the offence was committed was in charge of, and was responsible to, the company for the conduct of the business of the company, as well as the company, shall be deemed to be guilty of the offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly: Provided that where a company has different establishments or branches or different units in any establishment or branch, the concerned Head or the person in-charge of such establishment, branch, unit nominated by the company as responsible for food safety shall be liable for contravention in respect of such establishment, branch or unit: Provided further that nothing contained in this sub-section shall render any such person liable to any punishment provided in this Act, if he proves that the offence was committed without his knowledge or that he exercised all due diligence to prevent the commission of such offence.
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), where an offence under this Act has been committed by a company and it is proved that the offence has been committed with the consent or connivance of or is attributable to any neglect on the part of, any director, manager, secretary or other officer of the company, such director, manager, secretary or other officer shall also be deemed to be guilty of that offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly. Explanation.—For the purpose of this section,— (a) “company” means anybody corporate and includes a firm or other association of individuals; and (b) “director”, in relation to a firm, means a partner in the firm.
Introduction
Subsection (1) covers the company and persons who were in charge of and responsible to it for business conduct when the offence occurred. Its provisos address a nominated head or person in charge of a branch, establishment or unit, and a defence based on lack of knowledge or due diligence.
Subsection (2) separately reaches directors, managers, secretaries or other officers where consent, connivance or attributable neglect is proved. The Act's explanation includes a firm or association within 'company' and a partner within 'director' for a firm.
Key takeaways
Role and time matter
The section focuses on who was in charge of and responsible for the company's business when the offence occurred.
Unit responsibility can be nominated
For different establishments, branches or units, the provision addresses the nominated head or person responsible for food safety there.
Defence and additional officer test
Lack of knowledge or all due diligence can matter under subsection (1); subsection (2) separately requires proof of consent, connivance or attributable neglect.
Map the business structure
Record the company or firm, relevant establishment or unit and who was formally nominated to manage food safety there at the event date.
Trace decision and oversight records
Keep delegation, training, audit, corrective-action and incident records relevant to knowledge, diligence or alleged neglect.
Analyse each person's statutory route
Separate subsection (1) responsibility from subsection (2) consent, connivance or neglect. A job title alone does not answer every statutory question.
Official sources
Read the consolidated Act with the enacted and commenced amendments applicable to this section.
Practical checklist
Do
- Document food-safety responsibility by branch or unit.
- Retain training, inspection and escalation records.
- Review the actual individual's role at the time of an alleged offence.
Avoid
- Do not assume the company alone is always the only respondent.
- Do not assume every director is automatically guilty solely because of title.
Frequently asked questions
Can a firm be covered?
Yes. Section 66's explanation includes a firm in its definition of company and treats a partner as a director for that firm.
Is a named director automatically liable?
No. The applicable subsection's role, knowledge, due-diligence, consent, connivance or neglect requirements must be assessed on evidence.
Need help applying this provision to your situation?
Contact BizeneedLast updated 9 October 2026