ORDER :

1. The instant petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioners herein with a prayer to quash the proceedings of Criminal Complaint No.160/2012 pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sri Ganganagar and so also, the orders dated 06.11.2009 and 30.05.2012 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sri Ganganagar in above Criminal Complaint case.

2. By order dated 06.11.2009, the learned trial court rejected the application filed by the petitioners for sending the second sample of the drug for reanalysis to the Central Drugs Laboratory, Kolkata. By order dated 30.05.2012, the trial court took cognizance for the offences under Sections 18(a)(i) read with Sections 16(1)(a), 18(a)(vi), 22(1)(cca) and 18-B punishable under Sections 27(d), 22(3) and 28-A of the Drugs and Cosmetic Act against the petitioners and the co-accused persons.

3. Brief facts relevant and essential for disposal of the petition are noted herein below.

4. The Drug Inspector, Sri Ganganagar collected sample of a drug named Omeprazole capsules from a firm named M/s. Unique Marketing, Sri Ganaganagar with the manufacturing date of the drug being September, 2008, expiry date being August, 2010 and the manufacturer being the petitioner No. 1. The drug sample was divided into 4 equal parts. One sealed sample was provided to the vendor firm. One part was forwarded to the Govt. Analyst, Jaipur for analysis from where, a report dated 04.06.2009 was received to the effect that the sample did not conform to the standards laid down in the Act and the Rules. The Drug Inspector gave intimation to the vendor regarding the report of the Drug Laboratory by letter dated 22.06.2009. However, the vendor did not offer any significant response to this intimation. The Drug Inspector thereafter forwarded copy of the report alongwith a sealed sample to the distributor firm named M/s.Phutela Distributors, Jaipur vide letter dated 24.06.2009 who replied that it had procured the drug in question from the firm M/s. Meri Odin Lifesciences vide bills dated 30.10.2008 and 28.11.2008. The Drug Inspector in turn forwarded a copy of the analysis report to the petitioner No. 1 firm vide letter dated 16.07.2009. A reply dated 10.08.2009 was forwarded by the petitioner No.1 firm to the Drug Inspector wherein, it was admitted that the drug in question has been manufactured by it. However, the report of the drug laboratory was disputed and a request was made intending to challenge the said report by having the second sample re-examined through the Central Drugs Laboratory, Kolkata. On receiving this intimation from the petitioner firm, the Drug Inspector submitted an Application No.797 dated 07.10.2009 in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sri Ganganagar under Section 25(3) of the Drugs and Cosmetic Act (hereinafter will be referred to as ‘the Act’ for brevity) for passing appropriate orders. Whilst the said application was pending, the Drug Inspector claims to have received a letter dated 05.11.2009 from the manufacturing firm, retracting from its earlier prayer to have the second sample reexamined through the Central Drugs Laboratory, Kolkata. Accordingly, the trial court rejected the said application by order dated 06.11.2009. After concluding the enquiry, the Drug Inspector proceeded to present the complaint, which is subject matter of challenge in this petition, in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sri Ganganagar, who passed the order dated 30.05.2012 taking cognizance against the petitioners and other co-accused persons for the above offences.

5. The petitioners have now approached this Court through this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of the impugned orders and the complaint on various grounds which were canvassed by learned counsel Shri Pankaj Gupta during the course of arguments and are enumerated hereinbelow for the sake of ready reference.

(1) That the Drug Inspector failed to comply with the mand