K. SURESH REDDY
Nitin Sobti, S/o. Manmohan Sobti – Appellant
Versus
State of A. P. , Rep. PP. , Through the Drugs Inspector – Respondent
ORDER :
Since similar issue is involved in both these criminal petitions filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.
2. Crl.P.No.2894 of 2014 has been filed to quash the proceedings in P.R.C.No.21 of 2013 on the file of the learned II Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Machilipatnam, Krishna District, insofar as the petitioners/accused Nos.2 to 4 therein. Crl.P.No.14687 of 2014 has been filed to quash the proceedings in P.R.C.No.18 of 2014 on the file of the learned Additional Munsiff Magistrate, Chirala, insofar as the petitioners/accused Nos.2 to 4 therein.
3. Facts of the cases, briefly stated, are as under :
(ii) In the complaint, which led to registration of P.R.C.No.21 of 2013 on the file of the learned II Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Machilipatnam, it was alleged that on 20.08.2007, Drugs Inspector, Machilipatnam, picked up 4x6x10 Serra-D tablets, Batch No: ZSRT 702 Exp Dt:2/2010, manufactured by M/s. Laborate Pharmaceuticals India
Girdhari Lal Gupta v. D.H. Mehta & Anr.
Iridium India Telecom Limited v. Motorola Incorporated and others
Pooja Ravinder Devidasani v. State of Maharashtra
National Small Industries Corporation Limited v. Harmeet Singh Paintal (2010) 3 SCC 330
State of Karnataka v. Pratap Chand & Ors.
Specific averments showing a Director's responsibility for the company's conduct of business are necessary to establish vicarious liability under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955.
Vicarious liability under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act requires specific averments in the complaint to establish that individuals were in charge of and responsible for the conduct of the business at t....
Directors cannot be held liable for a company's criminal acts without specific allegations of their involvement; mere directorship is insufficient for establishing vicarious liability.
Vicarious liability under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 arises if the person was in charge and responsible for the day-to-day affairs of the company at the time of the offence, and the company mu....
Vicarious liability under Section 34 of Drugs and Cosmetics Act requires specific complaint averments that director/MD in charge and responsible for company business conduct; mere designation insuffi....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.