Back
JITENDRA KUMAR
Kwality Drug House – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
JUDGMENT (ORAL)
Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
2. The present petition under Section 482 Cr. PC has been preferred by the Petitioner for setting aside the order dated 4.8.2015 passed by Ld. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Siwan, in Complaint Case No.C-II 14 of 2015 whereby the Ld. Magistrate has taken cognizance of offence punishable under Section 27(d) read with Sections 16 and 18 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940.
3. As per the Official Complaint bearing No. 14 of 2015 filed by Drugs Inspector, Maharajganj, Siwan, against six accused persons including the Petitioner, Proprietor M/s. Quality Drugs House, alleging that during inspection of P.H.C. Basantpur, Siwan on 12.03.2010, sample of Antisnake Venom Antiserums I.P (Lyophilized), B. No. A5307024, manufactured by Bharat Serums & Vaccine Ltd., was collected by Drugs Inspector, Siwan and was sent to CDL/CRI, Kasauli, in the prescribed Form for test and analysis. As per the test report, the sample of the drug seized during inspection was found to be “of not standard quality in respect to neutralization of Kobra venom”. The report was received from the Government analyst vide letter No.CDL/20
Seizure of sub-standard anti-snake venom – Cognizance of offence – Period of limitation would commence from date of receipt of test/analysis report of seized drugs disclosing that seized drug was not....
The central legal point established in the judgment is that complaints filed under Section 27(d) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 must adhere to the time limitation prescribed under Section 468 C....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of considering the law and facts of the case before taking cognizance of an alleged offence under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940.
Conducting of an enquiry under Section 202(1) Cr.P.C is mandatory, when the accused is residing at a place beyond the area of jurisdiction of the Magistrate.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of adhering to the limitation period for filing a complaint and the necessity of impleading responsible persons in a complaint again....
The complaint under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act was filed beyond the three-year limitation period, violating the petitioners' right to re-examine the drug, leading to quashing of the proceedings.
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
