The judgment emphasizes the need to avoid the abuse of the process of law and highlights the exemptions for medical practitioners and hospitals under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, ultimately leading to the quashing of the entire criminal proceeding.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Ms. Pinky Anand, the learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr. Rajesh Ranjan, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, Mr. Manoj Kumar, the learned G.A.-III assisted by Mr. Ravi Prakash, the learned Spl.P.P appearing on behalf of the respondent State as well as on behalf of the O.P.No.2.

2. This petition has been filed for quashing the entire criminal proceeding in connection with N.D.P.S. Case No.20/2021 arising out of C.C. Case No.395 of 2021 including the order taking cognizance dated 08.06.2021 by which the learned Sessions Judge took cognizance against the petitioner for the offences under sections 22(a) of N.D.P.S. Act and section 28(a), 27(b)(ii) and 27(d) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940, pending in the court of learned Sessions Judge, Seraikella-Kharsawan at Seraikella.

3. The Opposite Party No.2-Drug Inspector has lodged complaint case alleging therein as under:

4. That on the complaint of one Sweta Sah, Jyotsna Jha, Preeti Kumari an enquiry was conducted on 19.5.2021 and in the said enquiry few questions were asked from the Hospital Management. It has been alleged that on 21.05.2021 again some quarries were made by the authority concerned with respect to use of supplied Remdesivir injection. On 23.5.21 by the Director, Medicines two other Drug Inspectors were deputed for the inspection and enquiry of 111 Save Life Hospital, Adityapur, on 24.05.21 a letter was sent to SDO Seraikella for deployment of sufficient security at the time of inspection. On 25.5.21 an enquiry/inspection was conducted i.e. in the alleged premises of the petitioner and from one Tata Sumo victa Ambulance. It has been alleged hue quantity of medicine kept illegally were recovered. It has been alleged that the same were total 123 in number. It has been further alleged that for storage of such medicines without drug license is an offence under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, it has further been alleged that storage of few medicines which comes under Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, i.e. for the small quantity.

5. Ms. Pinky Anand, the learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a practicing doctor at Seraikella and running hospital namely, 111 Save Life, at Adityapur. She submits that when the period of Covid-19 pandemic started, the Government had issued notification in terms of section 65 of the Disaster Management Act, 2005 and the hospitals was directed to reserve 50% of bed for Covid-19 patients by notification dated 13.04.2020. She submits that the hospital was working and providing treatment to the Covid-19 patients in terms of the notification of the Government of Jharkhand. By way of referring paragraph no.11 of the petition, she submits that the petitioner has raised some objection over the working culture of Health Department and misuse of the Government fund which has also been reported in social media as well as in the newspaper and for that reason, series of cases have been filed against this petitioner as well as the hospital. She submits that even the wife of the petitioner has not been spared and in some of the cases she has been made accused. She submits that the allegations have been alleged against the petitioner as well as the hospital which is malicious in nature. She submits that on 17.05.2021 the petitioner made a complaint about this in the e.mail before the Secretary, Home Department regarding the wrongful demand of money. She submits that certain medicines have been recovered from the ambulance of the hospital which are the essential medicines for emergency treatment and in view of Rule 123 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945, exemptions so far the drugs specified in Schedule-K are exempted from the provisions of Chapter-IV of the Act. She draws the attention of the Court to Schedule-K with regard to Rule 123 of the Rules, 19