Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Mr Justice Rakesh Kainthla, J
Neptune Life Science (P) Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Rakesh Kainthla, J.
The petitioner has filed the present petition for quashing of complaint No.05/2021 dated 18.08.2021, titled Union of India Vs. M/s. Nepture Life Sciences & Ors. pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Nalagarh (learned Trial Court). (Parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the same manner as they were arrayed before the learned Trial Court for convenience.)
2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present petition are that the complainant, Drug Inspector, filed a complaint against the accused for the commission of offences punishable under Section 18(a)(i) read with Section 16 punishable under Section 27(d) of the Drugs & Cosmetics Act, 1940. It was asserted that the Drug Inspector drew the sample of the Permetherin Lotion and sent it to the Government analyst, Regional Drugs Testing Laboratory, Chandigarh, for analysis after completing the codal formalities. The Government Analyst issued a report declaring that the sample was not of standard quality as it did not conform to the claim as per patent and propriety in respect of assay of Permetherin. The Drug Inspector issued the notices to the manufacturer who recalled the dr
The Magistrate must provide a reasoned order reflecting application of mind when summoning accused, ensuring sufficient grounds exist for proceeding with the case.
Summoning of accused in a criminal case is a serious matter – Criminal law cannot be set into motion as a matter of course.
In summons cases, post-issuance of summons under Section 204 Cr.P.C., Magistrate cannot entertain discharge or recall order; remedy lies under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Magistrate in summons cases cannot discharge accused or recall summons order post-issuance; remedy is under Section 482 CrPC, not discharge application.
An order under Section 204 of the Cr.P.C. cannot be valid unless the Magistrate provides clear reasoning to establish a prima facie case, ensuring ample judicial consideration.
Non-compliance with statutory provisions and resignation of the accused from the company absolved him of liability, leading to the quashing of the proceedings.
The Magistrate must provide sufficient reasoning when summoning an accused, reflecting a proper application of mind to the facts and law, as established in relevant case law.
A Magistrate must provide adequate reasoning in a cognizance order to demonstrate a prima facie case; failure to do so invalidates the order.
A cognizance order must provide sufficient reasoning to establish a prima facie case; failure to do so renders the order invalid.
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
