Back
2023 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 24779
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 19.10.2023 CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN Crl.O.P.No. 21668 of 2021 and Crl.M.P.Nos. 11752 & 11754 of 2021 Preeta Chirstabel Arunadevi Proprietrix of M/s.Crystal Healthcare. ... Petitioner Vs State Represented by Drugs Inspector, Valasaravakkam Range, O/o.The Asst. Director of Drug Control, Zone IV, Chennai – 600 006. ... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying to call for records in C.C.No.207 of 2021 in the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvallur for the contravention of Section 18(c) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 r/w. Rule 65(5)(1)(e) of Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945 and Section 18(a)(vi) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 r/w.Rule 105 Sub Rule 2 of Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945, punishable under Sections 27(d) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 and quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.Swami Subramanian For Respondent : Mr.A.Gopinath Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
ORDER
This petition has been filed to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.207 of 2021 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvallur.
2. The petitioner is an accused in the complaint lodged by the respondent for the contravention of Section 18(c) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 (herein after referred as the “Act”) r/w. Rule 65(5)(1)(e) of Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945 (herein after referred as the “Rules”) and Section 18(a)(vi) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 r/w. Rule 105 Sub Rule 2 of Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945, punishable under Sections 27(d) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940. The respondent filed a complaint alleging that, on inspection conducted by the Drugs Inspector on 17.09.2019, in the petitioner's shop and found that the petitioner had purchased and sold the drug Diclofenac Sodium Injection as 30ml multi dose vials after the date of notificatin which is in violation of Section 18(a)(vi) of the Act read with 105 sub rule 2 of the Rules made the pack size of Diclofenac Injection for human use shall be in single dose pack only, whereas, the petitioner had purchased and sold the said injection in 30ml multi dose vials. The details of purchases and sales of Diclofenac Sodium Injection 30 ml multi dose vials are as follows:
Purchases
| Sl.No | Name of the Drug | Batch No | Quantity | Supplier details |
| 1 | Diclofenac Injection Multidose vial 30 ml | 150415 | 360 vials | M/s.Ramson Medical Distributors Pvt. Ltd., Chennai – 60. Inv.No.RB000869 dated 24.01.2017. |
| 2. | Diclofenac Injection Multidose vial 30 ml | FDFI-063 | 2600 vials | M/s.Ramson Medical Distributors Pvt. Ltd., Chennai – 60. Inv.No.RB000869 dated 24.01.2017. |
Sales
| Sl.No | Sold to | Batch No. | Invoice No and Date | Quantity Nos |
| 1 | M/s.Vinayaka Medicals Karanodai, Chennai | 150415 | SF000544 dt : 27.03.17 | 15 |
| 2. | M/s.Vinayaka Medicals Karanodai, Chennai | 150415 | SF000522 dt : 27.03.17 | 15 |
| 3. | M/s.Kavitha Medicals, Somangalam- 600 069 | 15045 | SF000496 dt:13.02.17 | 5 |
| 4. | M/s.Shree Saravana Medicals, Medavakkam | 150415 | SF000492 dt:11.02.17 | 50 |
| 5. | M/s.Sournalakshmi Medicals, Virudhunagar | 150415 | SF003084 dt:14.02.17 | 250 |
| 6. | M/s.Sri Vinayaka Medicals, Karanodai, Chennai | 150415 | SF000508 dt:20.02.17 | 10 |
| 7. | M/s.Kavitha Medicals, Somangalam – 600 069 | 150415 | SF000481 dt:02.02.17 | 4 |
| 8. | M/s.Vijaya Bharathy Pharma Vellore – 632 004 | FDFI-063 | SF002875 dt:25.01.17 | 600 |
| 9. | M/s.Sri Saravana Pharma, Vellore – 632 004 | FDFI-063 | SF002874 dt:25.01.17 | 2000 |
3. It is in contravention under Section 18(c) of the Act read with
65(5)(1)(e) of the Rules. Therefore, a spot memo dated 17.09.2019 was issued as contemplated under Section 22(1)(cca) of the Act to produce the documents, records and registers in original for verification. The documents were produced by the accused and the show cause notice dated 28.11.2019 was issued to the accused. However, no reply was received and as such, the respondent filed a complaint to punish the petitioner under Section 27(d) of the Act for the contravention of Section 18(c) of the Act r/w. Rule 65(5)(1)(e) of the Rules and Section 18(a)(vi) of the Act r/w. Rule 105 Sub Rule 2 of the Rules. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the respondent lodged a complaint before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvallur. The Chief Judicial Magistrate has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint and as such, the cognizance taken by the Trial Court itself is illegal as per Section 32 of the Act. He further submitted that the petitioner is only a wholeseller and she is no way involved in manufacturing or packing of any drugs or combinations sold by her and hence the contravention of Section 18(a)(vi) of the Act r/w. Rule 105 sub rule 2 of the Rules is prima facie is not made out and the prosecution is bad in law.
5. As per Section 19(3) of the Act, the petitioner has not committed any violations as alleged in the complaint. The petitioner had purchased the Diclofenac injection multi dose vials from a duly
