Back
DUPPALA VENKATA RAMANA
Zest Pharma – Appellant
Versus
State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT
1. This Criminal Petition has been filed by the petitioners/A.1 to A.4 under Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, (for short "Cr.P.C") for quashing the proceedings in C.C.No.316 of 2013 on the file of the Court of II Additional Munsif Magistrate, Ongole, for the offence under Ss. 18(a)(i) read with Sec. 16 punishable under Sec. 27(d) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), against them.
2. Heard Sri Challa Ajay Kumar, learned counsel instructed by Sri Sunil Gawasane, learned counsel for the petitioners, and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1-State.
3. The brief facts of the case are as follows:
(i) On 20/9/2004, the Drugs Inspector-P.Rambabu (L.W.1) picked up the drug sample "Atenolol Tablets IP", Batch No.4007, Manufacturing Dated 05/2004 and Expiry Date 04/2007, manufactured by M/s.Zest Pharma, Indore(A.1) for analysis from the premises of A.P.H.M.H.I.D.C. Central Drug Stores, M.C.Hospital Campus, Ongole, in the presence of Pharmacist Grade-II (L.W.2) under intimation in Form No.17, as per Sec. 23 of the Act. On the same day, the Drug Inspector (L.W.1) sent one sealed portion of the sample drug (Atenol
The central legal point established in the judgment is the importance of adhering to the prescribed limitation period for filing a complaint under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940, and the consequen....
Court is of the view that after taking into account the law of limitation, the complaint ought to have been filed within three years from the date of detection of offence.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the conclusive nature of the State Analyst Report and the requirement to exercise the statutory right to request re-analysis by the Central Drugs L....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the significance of timely notification under Section 25(3) and (4) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, and the implications of the denial of the oppor....
The prosecution of drug quality violations is unsustainable when testing delays invalidate the accused's rights to challenge the results, highlighting the need for timely compliance under the Drugs a....
The judgment establishes that a valuable right to re-test a drug sample, as provided under Section 25(4) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, cannot be denied without due process, and failure to comply wi....
Drugs and Cosmetics - Criminal Proceedings quashed - Statutory right of petitioner for retesting drugs in question under sections 25(3) and 25(4) of Act has been violated by respondent and learned tr....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
