JUDGMENT :

(Rakesh Kainthla, J.)

The petitioner has filed the present petition for quashing Complaint No. 4 of 2018 titled State versus Norang Raj Aggarwal and others pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Nahan and summons dated 8.5.2018 against the petitioner. It has been asserted that a complaint was filed by the Drug Inspector before the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Nahan for the commission of offences punishable under Section 18(a)(i) read with Sections 17 and 27(d) of the Drugs and Cosmetic Act, 1940 and Rules framed thereunder. As per the prosecution, the Chief Medical Officer, Sirmour at Nahan placed a supply order on 12.7.2016 with M/s Novex Healthcare, Parwanoo, District Solan, H.P. to purchase certain drugs. The Drug Inspector saw some reports published on the social media that wrapper containing tablet Dicyclomine was also shown to be containing Dexamethasone. He directed the Chief Pharmacist, office of Chief Medical Officer to inform whether said medicine was purchased by the office of Chief Medical Officer or not. Chief Pharmacist replied that one lakh tablets of Dicyclomine tablets IP (Dexamethasone I.P. 0.5 mg) were received vide Bill No. 3122, dated 11.8.2017. 65,050 drugs were lying in the District Drug Store. Two cartons were manufactured by M/s Therawin Formulations and they were found to be properly labeled. The drug Inspector drew the sample of the drugs for testing. He filed a complaint stating that the supply order was placed with M/s Novex Healthcare, Parwanoo and they are also liable. Learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Nahan issued the summons. The manufacturers filed a petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., which was allowed by this Court on 6.9.2022 and the complaint was quashed against the manufacturers. Learned Trial Court erred in summoning the petitioner because there was no evidence to connect the petitioner with the commission of the crime. The petitioner is a chemist and he has no role to play in misbranding the drugs. The complaint against the manufacturers was quashed. Therefore, it was prayed that the present petition be allowed and the complaint pending before the learned Trial Court and order dated 8.5.2018 passed by the learned Trial Court be set aside.

2. The petition is opposed by filing a reply asserting that the chemist is responsible for the quality of the product and adhering to the provisions of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act and Rules. The drugs supplied by the petitioner’s Firm were not of standard quality. Hence, the petitioner is liable to be prosecuted. The drug falls within the definition of misbranded drug and the complaint was rightly filed. Therefore, it was prayed that the present petition be dismissed.

3. A rejoinder denying the contents of the reply and affirming those of the petition was filed.

4. I have heard Ms. Shalini Thakur, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Jitender Sharma learned Additional Advocate General for the respondent-State.

5. Ms. Shalini Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that this Court had quashed the proceedings against the company and the proceedings cannot continue against the present petitioner. Hence, she prayed that the present petition be allowed and the proceedings against the petitioner be quashed.

6. Mr. Jitender Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General for the respondent-State submitted that the petitioner is a chemist and he is responsible for maintaining the quality of the drugs. The drugs were misbranded and the petitioner cannot escape from the liability. Hence, he prayed that the present petition be dismissed.

7. I have given considerable thought to the submissions at the bar and have gone through the records carefully.

8. A copy of the order passed by this Court in Cr.MP(M) No. 362 of 2019, decided on 6.9.2021 shows that the proceedings were quashed against Virender Kansal, Partner of the Firm and M/s Therawin Formulations. The present petitioner is sought to be prosecute