Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
Chittaranjan Dash
Naveen Bhatia – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioners' statutory rights to challenge the report. (Para 6 , 7 , 9) |
| 2. implications of procedural delays and legal rights. (Para 10 , 14) |
| 3. recognition of lapses by authorities leading to prosecution invalidation. (Para 12 , 15) |
| 4. final quashing of the proceedings. (Para 16) |
JUDGMENT :
Chittaranjan Dash, J.
1. By means of this application, the Petitioners seek to invoke the inherent powers of this Court for quashing the proceedings initiated against them in connection with 2(C) CC Case No.55 of 2012 pending before the learned S.D.J.M., Sonepur, for the alleged commission of offences under Section 27 (d) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 .
2. The background facts of the case are that the Drugs Inspector, Subarnapur Range, Subarnapur, lodged a complaint alleging that on 22.08.2007, he collected a statutory sample of the drug “Vigizyme Liquid,” Batch No. VVZ/01, M/D: 06/07, E/D: 08/2008, manufactured by M/s Three B Health Care Ltd., Opp. Dental College, Rampur Road, Paonta Sahib (H.P.) from the sales premises of M/s New Life Medical Store, At/Po-Ullunda, District Subarnapur, through Sri Lalit Kumar Sahu, the then Drug Inspector, Bolangir Range, vide Form-17, for t
The court ruled that mandatory compliance with the statutory provisions in drug testing processes is essential; failure to do so invalidates prosecution.
The expiry of a drug sample before testing negates the prosecution's case, impacting the accused's right to challenge the evidence.
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 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 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....
Prosecution quashed for delay in sample testing beyond 60 days without extension under Rule 45 and failure to send sample to manufacturer under Section 23(4)(iii), depriving re-analysis right post sh....
The complaint under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act was filed beyond the three-year limitation period, violating the petitioners' right to re-examine the drug, leading to quashing of the proceedings.
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
