Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral)

1. The present applicants before this Court have challenged the order dated 14.01.2015 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pithoragarh as well as the order dated 26.08.2015 passed by the learned Session Judge, Pithoragarh in Criminal Revision No. 06 of 2015. By means of the present application, the applicants have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

2. By the order dated 14.01.2015, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pithoragarh, after taking into consideration the evidence produced by the prosecution under Sections 244 of Cr.P.C. as well as considering the application of the present applicants under Section 245 of Cr.P.C. for discharge, has rejected the application of the applicants (under Section 245 of Cr.P.C.) on the ground that prima facie there are enough materials for the prosecution to prosecute the accused. Thereafter, against the said order the applicants also preferred a revision before the revisional court, which was ultimately dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge, Pithoragarh vide order dated 26.08.2015. Now, the trial is proceeding in accordance with law.

3. The important aspect, which must be taken note at this stage, is that the proceedings in the present case was initiated as far back as on 10.03.2003, when the Drug Inspector, on a routine check took samples of a drug called “Dexamethasone Sodium Phosphate” (which was injectable medicine) having a Batch No. 1220, D/M 06/02 and D/E 05/04 which was manufactured by one M/s Brawn Laboratories Ltd., Faridabad, from the Government Hospital – B.D. Pandey, District Hospital, Pithoragarh and sent for Government Analyst, and ultimately to Kolkata. The drug in question was declared to be not of standard quality and the reason was that “the sample does not conform to IP with respect to volume of injection (Low).” This report, which is in Form No. 13 of Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1940 dated 30.07.2003/04.09.2003. Consequently, thereafter a complaint was filed by the Drug Inspector in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pithoragarh on 08.12.2014 for violation of Section 18(a)(i) and 18(a)(vi) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 for selling a drug which is not of a standard quality or misbranded or adulterated or spurious and a drug which is in contravention of provision of Drugs and Cosmetics Act. This makes a criminal offence under Section 27 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, under which the complaint was filed.

4. As per the complaint, which is filed as Annexure 3 to the present application, after receipt of drugs and cosmetics report, due notice was sent to the concerned persons, including the manufacturer of the drug. What reply the manufacturer gave to the said notice is nowhere on record, but pointed question being put to the learned counsel for the applicant - Mr. Shiv Nath Kumar. It was stated that prior to the filing of the complaint show cause notice was served on M/s Navchem Pharmaceutical, Meerut, who was the supplier of the said medicine to the District Hospital, Pithoragarh. The reply to the said show cause notice by M/s Navchem Pharmaceutical, Meerut was that they have purchased the drugs from M/s Brawn Laboratories Ltd., Faridabad, Haryana. Thereafter, the Inspector of Drugs Uttarakhand sent the letters to M/s Navchem Pharmaceutical, Meerut as well as M/s Brawn Laboratories Ltd. vide letters dated 15.11.2003 (annexure Nos. 7 and 8 to the application), which shows that the Inspector Drugs informed both these companies that a sample of Dexamethasom Sodium Phosphate Injection I.P. was taken from Medicine Store B.D. Pandey, District Hospital Pithoragarh on 10.03.2003 and the same was declared of not of standard quality by the Government Analyst, Uttaranchal and it was further requested to them to stop further sale of the said drugs.

5. Learned counsel for the applicants Ms. Pushpa Joshi, learned Senior Advocate with Mr. Shiv Nath Kumar has