IN THE HIGH Court OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 25.11.2025 CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY Sivaraj Proprietor for M/s.Siva Medicines, No.1A, Kailasanathar Kovil South Street, Valangaiman, Thiruvarur District. ... Petitioner Vs The State of Tamilnadu, Rep. by the Drug Inspector, Mannarkudi Range I/C, Office of the Assistant Director of Drugs Control, Thanjavur Zone.

No.2975, Gandhiji Road, Thanjavur – 613 001. ... Respondent Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Sections 397 r/w 401 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to call for the records and set aside the judgment in Criminal Appeal No. 1 of 2020 dated 29.11.2021 on the file of the Principal District & Session Judge, Thiruvarur in confirming the judgement made in C.C.No. 3 of 2018 dated 01.11.2019 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvarur and acquit the petitioner from all the charges.

For Petitioner : Mr.I.Abrar Mohamed Abdullah For Respondent : Mr.S.Sugendran Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

This revision is filed against the judgment of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvarur dated 01.11.2019 made in C.C.No.03 of 2018 and the judgment of the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Thiruvarur dated

29.11.2021 made in C.A.No.1 of 2020.

2. By the aforementioned judgment, the trial Court had found the petitioner guilty of the offence punishable under Section 27(d) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 read with Rules 65(2), 65(3) and 65(4)(3)(1) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules and sentenced him to undergo one year simple imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.20,000/- for each rules, totalling Rs.60,000/-, and in default of payment of fine, to undergo one month simple imprisonment.

3. The case of the prosecution is that this is a private complaint filed by the Drug Controller under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 alleging an offence under Section 27(d) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act read with Rules 65(2), 65(3) and 65(4)(3)(1) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1940. As per the complaint, the accused is running a pharmacy at Kailasanathar Temple South Street, Valangaiman. On 13.06.2015, when an inspection was made, it was found that from 01.05.2015 to 13.06.2015, drugs were dispensed to the public without the supervision of a qualified pharmacist. Secondly, certain drugs were dispensed and sold without maintaining proper cash credit memos and registers. The said action on the part of the petitioner/accused amounts to violation of the Rules and consequently an offence punishable under the Act. Accordingly, when show cause notice was issued, the accused replied stating that the pharmacist had gone to his native place on account of illness and could not return to manage the pharmacy. Therefore, considering that reply and the fact that the drugs were dispensed without the supervision of a pharmacist and the cash credit memos and records were not maintained as per the Rules in respect of the drugs mentioned in the show cause notice, the complainant concluded that the offence was made out and accordingly filed the private complaint.

4. The accused pleaded not guilty and chose to contest the case. The Drug Controller who inspected the premises, namely Dhanabal, was examined as P.W.1, and Sabita, the other Drug Controller who concluded the proceedings later, was examined as P.W.2. Exs.P1 to P20 were also marked. Upon being questioned about the incriminating circumstances and material evidence on record, the accused denied the same as false. Thereafter, no evidence was presented on behalf of the defence. The trial Court, considering the reply issued by the accused, the inspection report, the evidence of P.W.1 and 2, and the documentary evidence including the receipts for buying and selling the drugs and the omission to enter the same in the cash credit memos/registers, concluded that the accused was guilty of the offence and imposed the sentence as aforementioned. Aggrieved by the same, when appeal was filed, the appellate