Back
S. VISHWAJITH SHETTY
Vishwanath – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka – Respondent
ORDER (CAV)
Accused No.2 is before this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. read with Section 528 of BNSS, 2023, with a prayer to quash the entire proceedings in CC No.369/2023 pending before the Court of Civil Judge and JMFC, at Laxmeshwar, Gadag District, arising out of PCR No.25/2023, registered for the offences punishable under Section 18(a)(vi) and Section 27(d) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act of 1940’ for short).
2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
3. Facts leading to filing of this petition narrated briefly are, the Assistant Drugs Controller, Gadag Circle had filed a private complaint in PCR No.25/2023 before the Court of Civil Judge at JMFC, Laxmeshwar against accused No.1/Dr.S.C.Nekar @ Sri. Siddappa Channabasappa Nekar and the petitioner herein. The allegation in the complaint is that accused No.1, who was not a registered medical practitioner as provided under the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945, was running a clinic in the name ‘Sanjeevani Clinic’, at Laxmeshwar in Gadag District and though he did not possess any drug licence to sell the stock or exhibit any drug, he was purchasing allopathy drugs from accused No.2 and
Unauthorised sale of drugs and violation of license conditions – Section 468 of Cr.P.C. is not applicable.
Point of law: Quash of Criminal proceedings –Rejected - Disputed question of facts to be raised before trial court -
Public servants filing complaints in their official capacity are entitled to appeal against acquittals under Section 417(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code, ensuring their role as complainants is reco....
Drugs Inspectors under Section 8 of 1954 Act lack statutory power to file direct complaints; must forward to police for FIR as per Supreme Court directions; existing complaints quashed for procedural....
Cognizance of offences under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act requires adherence to procedural mandates, especially under Section 202 of Cr. P. C when the accused is beyond jurisdiction.
The court ruled that a storekeeper cannot be prosecuted for failing to disclose drug acquisition details if he did not procure the drugs, rendering the trial court's cognizance void.
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
