IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Anita Sumanth, Sunder Mohan, JJ
M/s.Dharma Pharmacy Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
The State of Tamilnadu – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. referral on competence of allopathy drugs inspector for prosecution. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. parties contend on drugs inspector's complaint filing authority. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. drugs inspectors lodge complaints with police for fir registration. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 11) |
| 4. quash complaints for irregularity; liberty for fresh prosecution. (Para 12 , 16) |
| 5. online ads covered under act's inclusive advertisement definition. (Para 13 , 14 , 15) |
The above quash petitions are listed before us, pursuant to an Administrative Order passed by Hon’ble Chief Justice, on the reference made by a learned Single Judge of this Court to decide the following question:
“In the absence of any amendment toSection 8of the Special Act, whether a Drugs Inspector, who is appointed under of the Special Act viz.,Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954, is competent to launch a prosecution, in respect of any drug falling under Ayurvedha, Siddha or Unani, if the said Drugs Inspector, is an Allopathy Drugs Inspector? or in other words Whether in respect of violation or contravention of any provisions of the Special Act viz.,Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 195
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.