Back
RAKESH KAINTHLA
Sunil Arora – Appellant
Versus
State of H. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Rakesh Kainthla, J.
The Drug Inspector received a telephonic complaint regarding discolouration of the powder in the vials of Rabcer Injection on 29.5.2010. He visited the Firm M/s Anil Medicos, Naya Bazar, Nahan. Anil Gupta was present on the premises. The Drug Inspector inspected the injection and found discolouration in many vials. He also noticed that the same batch had different coloured drugs in different vials and the colour ranged from off-white/yellowish white to brown. He obtained the samples and directed the owner to withdraw the unsold product from the market immediately. The samples were sent to a Government Analyst and were found to be not of the standard quality.
2. A notice was served upon the accused No.1 Anil Gupta under Section 25 to adduce evidence to controvert the report but no option was exercised. Accused no. 1 submitted invoices issued by M/s Astron Life Sciences, Ludhiana. This Firm disclosed the name of M/s Vision Medilink Ahmadabad, who in turn disclosed the name of M/s Embark Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd., Rurki. The Drug Inspector presented the complaint against the accused for trial. The case was committed to the learned Sessions Judge, who framed t
The central legal point established in the judgment is the importance of adhering to the prescribed limitation period for filing a complaint under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940, and the consequen....
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....
Court is of the view that after taking into account the law of limitation, the complaint ought to have been filed within three years from the date of detection of offence.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of adhering to the limitation period for filing a complaint and the necessity of impleading responsible persons in a complaint again....
The judgment establishes that a valuable right to re-test a drug sample, as provided under Section 25(4) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, cannot be denied without due process, and failure to comply wi....
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
