IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

367 Date of decision: 10.03.2026 State through Senior Drugs Inspector, Rohtak Zone, Rohtak ...Appellant (s)

VERSUS Ram Narain Saini and another ...Respondent(s)

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ Present :- Mr. Armaan Dahiya, DAG Haryana.

Ms. Khushboo Ansari, Advocate for the respondent(s)

(Legal Aid Counsel).

*****

VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral)

1. The present appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated 09.03.2010 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rohtak in Criminal Complaint No.204/2 of 2000 titled as ‘State through Senior Drugs Inspector, Rohtak Zone, Rohtak Vs. Ram Narain Saini and another’ arising out of complaint under Section 18/27 of the Drugs & Cosmetics Act, 1940 and rules made thereunder, whereby the accused were acquitted from the charges levelled against them.

2. The complaint in question was filed by the State through the Senior Drugs Inspector, Rohtak Zone, Rohtak against the accused- respondent(s) alleging therein that on 07.07.1998, the complainant, alongwith the District Drug Inspector, conducted an inspection of the clinic of Dr. Sunil Verma, BAMS, situated at Sukhpura Chowk, G.T. Road, Rohtak, a