Back
G. JAYACHANDRAN
Gopal Lifesciences (Unit II) – Appellant
Versus
State of Tamil Nadu Represented by its Drug Inspector – Respondent
ORDER :
G. Jayachandran, J.
The petitioners herein are M/s Gopal Life Sciences, Solan, Himachala Pradesh, its Partner and Authorised Signatory-cum-Manager.
2. A complaint by the Drug Inspector, Vellore Zone under Section 32 of The Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940(hereinafter referred to “the Act”), for contravention of Section 18(a)(i) and punishable under Section 27(d) of the said Act laid before the Judicial Magistrate, Chengam, Tiruvannamalai District and taken on file as S.T.C.No.183 of 2022.
3. The gist of the complaint is that, on 30/07/2019, a sample of 4x100ml TERBOT-G syrup (Terbutaline sulphate, Bromhexine, Guaiphenesin and Menthol Syrup), B.No.GLL-8036, M/D:7/18, E/D:6/20, Mfd by Gopal Lifesciences, Hill top Industrial Estate, Near Export Zone, Jharmajri, Baddi (H.P)-173205(marked as 45/MSA/19/TVM-II) was drawn for analysis from M/s Vasuki Medicals situated at No.223, Nadu Street, Mothakkal Post, Tiruvannamalai-II Range, under Form-17 dated 30.07.2019 and sent for analysis to the Government Analyst under Form-18 dated 30.07.2019. The said drug has been declared as Not of Standard Quality drug by the Government Analyst, Drug Testing Laboratory, Chennai-6 for the reason that the
The judgment underscores the necessity of adhering to procedural requirements in drug quality cases, particularly the timely filing of complaints and the rights of manufacturers to contest lab findin....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the rights of the accused under sections 25(3) and 25(4) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 must be upheld, and any violation of these right....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the right of the accused to have a sample tested under Section 25 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act and the consequences of delay in testing, which ca....
[The report of the Government Analyst under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act is conclusive unless challenged within 28 days, and compliance with the sampling procedure is mandatory.]
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 main legal point established in the judgment is the conclusive nature of the State Analyst Report and the requirement to exercise the statutory right to request re-analysis by the Central Drugs L....
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....
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....
The prosecution of drug quality violations is unsustainable when testing delays invalidate the accused's rights to challenge the results, highlighting the need for timely compliance under the Drugs a....
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
