SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 15722

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
DR. RAJESH THAKARE – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH – Respondent
CRMP/2482/2025



##PAGE1##

1

2025:CGHC:61960

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

CRMP No. 2482 of 2025

1 - Dr. Rajesh Thakare S/o Ramchandra Thakare Aged About 57

Years Occupation Service R/o Shree Baidyanath Ayurved Bhawan

Pvt. Ltd, Great Nag Road, Nagpur, Maharashtra.

2 - Ramesh Chandra S/o Shersingh Sharma Aged About 62 Years

Occupation Service R/o Shree Baidyanath Ayurved Bhawan Pvt.

Ltd, Great Nag Road, Nagpur, Maharashtra.

3 - Anil S/o Sajjan Dave Aged About 66 Years R/o 60, Professor

Layout Hingna Road Tea Point, Nagpur, Maharashtra.

... Petitioner(s)

versus

State Of Chhattisgarh Through District Ayurved Officer, Ayurved

Office, Janjgir-Champa, District Janjgir-Champa C.G.

---- Respondents

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For Petitioner : Mr. Rajeev Shrivastava, Sr. Advocate

with Ms. Kajal Chandra, Advocate.

For Respondent-State : Mr. Ajit Singh, GA.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hon'ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge

Order on Board

19.12.2025

##PAGE2##

2

1. The petitioner has filed this petition under Section 528 of the

BNSS, 2023 being aggrieved by order dated 01.08.2025 passed

by learned 4th Additional Session Judge, Janjgir, District Janjgir

Champa (C.G.) in Criminal Revision No.23 of 2025, whereby the

Revisional Court affirmed the order dated 10.05.2023 passed by

the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Janjgir issuing process in Complaint

Case No.472/2023 for violation of Section 33EE(a) and (f) which is

punishable under Section 33-I (1) (a)(ii) of the Drugs and

Cosmetics Act, 1940, (for short, ‘Act of 1940’).

2. Relevant facts for disposal of this petition is that on 13.11.2018, Dr.

Yashpal Singh Dhruv, the then District Ayurved Officer and Drug

Inspector, Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh, collected 10 samples of

Ayurvedic medicines under the Act of 1940 from a medical store

named Shri Supplier, near Sabzi Mandi, DD Plaza, Janjgir. One of

the samples "Saindhwadi Tel" with Batch No.175210003

(manufactured in Jan 2018, expiry Dec 2020), was sent for testing

via Letter No.2018/2397-99 dated 16.11.2018 to the Government

Analyst, Drugs Testing Laboratory and Research Centre, Raipur.

The Government Analyst, vide Form 13A, issued Test Report No.

2019/695 dated 28.02.2019, declaring "Saindhwadi Tel" as

substandard as the sample failed to meet required standards. On

receiving the report, the complainant intimated the manufacturer of

the drug, Shri Baidyanath Ayurved Bhawan Pvt. Ltd., Nagpur, by

letter no. Letter No.0/O.Ni./2019/545-47 dated 25.05.2019, to get

##PAGE3##

3

the second part of the sample tested from Appellate Laboratory,

PLIM, Ghaziabad, and to appear before the Sessions Court,

Janjgir-Champa alongwith the test fee. Owner of said

manufacturer company did not appear and a request for

prosecution sanction was sent to the Competent Authority (Drug

Controller and Director, AYUSH Directorate, Chhattisgarh); said

sanction was received and after receiving the prosecution sanction

on 30.10.2019, the Drug Inspector filed a complaint before the

Sessions Judge, Janjgir, against the petitioners for violation of

Section 33EE(a) and (f) which is punishable under Section 33-I (1)

(a)(ii) of the Act of 1940. The learned Sessions Court, Janjgir on

receiving the complaint, vide its order dated 07/07/2022 returned

the complaint with a direction to file the complaint case before the

competent Court and in furtherance of said direction, complaint

case was filed before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Janjgir on

11/07/2022. Vide its order dated 10/05/2023, the Chief Judicial

Magistrate, Janjgir registered a Complaint Case No.472/2023

against the petitioners and issued process against the petitioners

for violation of Section 33EE(a) and (f) which is punishable under

Section 33-I (1) (a)(ii) of the Act of 1940. Being aggrieved by the

order of issuance of process, the petitioners filed a revision before

the Sessions Judge, Janjgir. Learned Sessions Judge vide its

order dated 01.08.2025 dismissed the revision of t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top