Back
2006 Supreme(Raj) 956
High Court Of Rajasthan
Judgename : SATYA PRAKASH PATHAK
BHANWAR LAL - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN - Respondent
CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION 822 Of 2005
Decided On : 04/07/2006
Rakesh Arora
The renewal of the petitioner's license influenced the court's decision to allow the petition and release the seized medicines.
Headnote:
Sec. 482 - Criminal Procedure - Quashing of order denying release of seized medicines due to expired license
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought to quash the order denying release of seized medicines due to an expired license.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that keeping the seized medicines was of no consequence as the petitioner's license had been renewed, and they were entitled to sell the medicine.
Issues: Validity of denying release of seized medicines due to expired license
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the renewal of the petitioner's license and deemed it proper to allow the petition, directing the release of the seized medicines upon furnishing a personal bond.
Final Decision: The petition was allowed, and the seized medicines were directed to be handed over to the petitioner upon fulfilling the specified conditions.
( 1 ) THIS petition under Sec. 482 of the code of Criminal Procedure has been filed for quashing and setting aside the order passed by the trial court which was affirmed by learned revisional Court whereby prayer made by the petitioner to release the medicines seized from the shop of the petitiner was declined.
( 2 ) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submits that it is agreed that at the relevant time when the medicines were seized, the petitioner was not having valid licence but subsequently the licence was renewed in the name of same properitor and now renewed licence is upto year 2008. According to learned counsel, no purpose will be served by keeping the medicines with the Drug Inspector as it will expire after certain period.
( 3 ) LEARNED Public Prosecutor submits that the trial court and the revisional court both considered the matter properly, therefore, this misc. petition deserves to be dismissed. After careful consideration of the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the opinion that keeping the medicines seized is of no consequence particularly when the licence has been renewed, and now the petitioner is entitled to sell the medicine which was seized by the Drug inspector.
( 4 ) IN view of foregoing discussion, I deem it proper to allow the petition. In the result the misc. petition is allowed and it is hereby directed that on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 30,000/- with like amount of surety to the satisfaction of the learned court, the medicines so seized may be handed-over to the petition.
