Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Mr Justice Rakesh Kainthla, J
Atul Kumar Gupta – Appellant
Versus
State of H.P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Rakesh Kainthla, J.
The present revision is directed against the order dated 8th July 2024 passed by learned Special Judge (II) Nahan (learned Trial Court), vide which the charges were ordered to be framed against the petitioner (accused before the learned Trial Court). (The parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the same manner as they are arrayed before the learned Trial Court for convenience.)
2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present petition are that the Drugs Inspector filed a complaint against the petitioner and other accused asserting that he had received secret information that spurious and illegal drugs were being manufactured by M/s Soliance Pharma Products, Village Surajpur, Tehsil Paonta Sahib, H.P. The drugs officials of Haryana had seized a huge quantity of drugs from the Godown of M/s Lincoln Pharmaceutical Limited. An F.I.R. was lodged to this effect with SHO P.S. Saha (Haryana). The police sealed the premises of M/s Himalayan Laboratories, Village Surajpur, Tehsil Paonta Sahib on 13.07.2021 and recorded an entry No. 56(A), dated 13.07.2011 in the daily diary. The Drugs Inspector sent a letter to the SDM, Paonta Sahib, to depute an Execut
At the charge framing stage, the court assesses prima facie evidence without examining the defense, and the accused's claims regarding analysis reports and license validity were insufficient.
The expiry of a drug sample before testing negates the prosecution's case, impacting the accused's right to challenge the evidence.
At the charge stage, evidence demonstrating a case's absurdity permits consideration of defense materials of impeccable quality, overriding merely prosecution's reports.
The right of a manufacturer to adduce evidence in controversion of the report of the Government Analyst is not violated if the sample has already been tested by the Central Drugs Laboratory.
The judgment establishes that the failure of the prosecution to adhere to statutory requirements, particularly regarding the right to contest the Government Analyst's report, can lead to the quashing....
Seizure of sub-standard quality of drug – When report of Government Analyst itself is shrouded in serious suspicion and it is not sure as to whether report of Government Analyst relates to sample lif....
Quash of Criminal proceedings - once it is shown that the right of accused to adduce evidence in controversion of the Government Analyst’s report is defeated due to acts and omission of the Drugs Ins....
The failure to comply with mandatory provisions regarding sample handling and report disclosure under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act vitiates the prosecution against manufacturers, ensuring their right ....
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
