Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
Nicholas Piramal India Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J.
1. Petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as “Cr.P.C.”) read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed on behalf of the Petitioners to set aside the Impugned Order dated 17.04.2018 of Ld. ASJ, upholding the Order dated 30.11.2015 of Ld. M.M. dismissing the Discharge Application filed by the Petitioners in a Complaint under Section 18(a)(i)/27(d) of Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 (hereinafter referred to as the “D&C Act”).
2. Briefly stated, a Criminal Complaint 12/2004 dated 09.02.2004 was filed under Section 18(a) (i)/27(d) of D&C Act. The averments made therein were that on 11.04.2002, the Complainant/Respondent Drug Inspector collected the sample of the drug “Tixylix” (Children Cough Linctus) Batch No.B-2024, D/M March, 2002, D/E February, 2005;Manufactured by M/s Nicolas Piramal India Ltd. (Accused No. 5) as per the procedure laid down under Section 23 of the D&C Act for the purpose of Test or Analysis from Accused No. 1 Kewal Bajaj, Proprietor and In-charge of M/s Kay Sons, Nangal Raya, New Delhi. Intimation of the collection of samples in Form-17, was given along with one s
At the charge stage, evidence demonstrating a case's absurdity permits consideration of defense materials of impeccable quality, overriding merely prosecution's reports.
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 the failure of the prosecution to adhere to statutory requirements, particularly regarding the right to contest the Government Analyst's report, can lead to the quashing....
Seizure of sub-standard quality of drug – When report of Government Analyst itself is shrouded in serious suspicion and it is not sure as to whether report of Government Analyst relates to sample lif....
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....
The expiry of a drug sample before testing negates the prosecution's case, impacting the accused's right to challenge the evidence.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the rights of the accused under sections 25(3) and 25(4) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 must be upheld, and any violation of these right....
The right to re-examine a drug sample under Section 25(3) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act is a critical safeguard for the accused, and failure to comply with this provision invalidates the complaint.
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
