Back
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
DEEPAK GUPTA
Ved Parkash – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. case facts surrounding the drug inspection and charges. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments regarding the liability of distributors and retailers. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 3. court's views on compliance and legal responsibilities. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 14 , 15) |
| 4. final decision on probation and costs. (Para 28 , 32 , 34) |
JUDGMENT :
Deepak Gupta, J.
1. The three criminal revisions titled above have arisen out of the same case in the following facts and circumstances.
2. Complaint was filed by State of Haryana through District Drug In-spector under Section 18(a)(i) read with Section 17A, 17B and 18B of The Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 [hereinafter referred as 'the Act'] and Rules made thereunder, against as many as ten accused as named below:
Manufacturer:
1) M/s Burnent Pharma 974 MIE, Bahadurgarh
2) Sh. Surender Kumar Seth son of Inder Sain
3) Sh. H.S. Rathi son of Sh. Sahu Ram
4) Sh. Jai Gopal son of Sh. Luxami Chand
5) Sh. Darshan Arora son of Sh. Des Raj
Dealer/Distributor:
6) M/s Kavita Medico Agencies, Rohtak
7) Sh. Ved Parkash son of Sh. Gian Dev
Retailer:
8) M/s Super Medicos, Charkhi Dadri
9) Sh. Bhupinder Singh son of Sh. Dalip Singh
10) Attar Singh Phogat son of Sh. Bhola Ram Phogat
3.1 As pe
Conviction under drug regulation provisions requires proving non-compliance, highlighting the importance of disclosing the manufacturer's details for legal protection.
Directors are liable under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act for the conduct of the company's business, and summoning orders require only a prima facie case without extensive procedural scrutiny.
Possession of controlled drugs without proper licensing constitutes an offer for sale, leading to conviction under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act.
At the stage of framing charges, the court should only consider the allegations made in the complaint and the supporting documents. The court should not delve into the evidence or conduct a mini-tria....
Seizure of drugs for violation of legal provisions – A genuine complaint cannot be quashed without trial.
The conviction under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act requires proof of sale or stocking of drugs without a valid license, and procedural compliance in investigations is crucial for upholding such convict....
Sildenafil Citrate is an allopathic drug and it cannot be used by anybody else unless a person who holds licence for it.
Distribution of drugs - Order of ‘issue of process’ - Applicant has produced invoices and certificate of the analyst, wherein, there is warranty that the subject drug obtained is of standard quality ....
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
