Back
M.K.MUKHERJEE, S.S.M.QUADRI
State Of Rajasthan – Appellant
Versus
Sanjay Kumar – Respondent
Judgment
Quadri, J.-Special leave is granted.
2. The State of Rajasthan has assailed the validity of the judgment and order of the High Court of Rajasthan in S.B. Crl. Misc. Petition No. 293 of 1996 dated April 11, 1996.
3. On February 29, 1988, the Senior Drugs Inspector (I.B.), collected samples of (i) tenokap suspension B. No. 303 and (ii) Tab. Oxyphenbutabne I.P. B.No. 1114 from M/s. Jayshree Medical Centre, Baroda (Gujarat), meant for public sale. He sent those samples for chemical analysis to Government Analyst, Food and Drugs Laboratory, Baroda on March 2, 1988. In his report of July 2, 1988, the Government Analyst opined that those drugs were not of standard quality. After due enquiry and investigation the Drug Controller ordered prosecution of the respondents on February 3, 1990 and accordingly the Drugs Inspector (IB), Directorate, Medical and Health Services, Rajasthan, Jaipur, filed complaint under Section 18(A) read with Sections 16, 17 and 17A punishable under Sections 27(d) and 27(b)(i) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940, on June 28, 1991. On the same day, the learned Additional Civil Judge & C.J.M., Court No. 6, Jaipur took cognizance on the said complaint as Cr
None of the cases explicitly indicate that they have been overruled, reversed, or explicitly treated as bad law. The list primarily references the original case of Sanjay Kumar (supra) and its treatment in subsequent references, but there is no clear indication that any case has been overruled or invalidated. Many references cite Sanjay Kumar as a binding precedent or relevant authority, especially in relation to limitations under Cr.P.C. and other procedural issues.
Followed / Cited as Binding Precedent:
Several entries (e.g., Gauri Kanta Borah VS State of Assam - 2011 0 Supreme(Gau) 342, P. B. Pesticides VS State of Punjab - 2014 0 Supreme(P&H) 776, Chandan Pesticides VS State of Punjab - 2014 0 Supreme(P&H) 925, Kewal Dairy VS State of U. P. - 2024 0 Supreme(All) 1683, Kwality Drug House VS State of Bihar - Crimes (2024), Kwality Drug House VS State of Bihar - 2024 0 Supreme(Pat) 568, Ali Mohammad Bhat VS UT of J&K - Crimes (2025)) cite Sanjay Kumar (supra) and treat it as a relevant, binding, or guiding authority, especially concerning limitations under Cr.P.C., the start of limitation periods, and procedural aspects. These references suggest that Sanjay Kumar is still considered good law and relevant.
The case of State of Rajasthan v. Sanjay Kumar (AIR 1998 SC 1919) appears multiple times, often cited for its observations on limitation and procedural law, indicating its continued authority.
The references in Anil Kapoor VS State of Punjab - 2023 0 Supreme(P&H) 1405 and Innova Captab VS State of Haryana - 2023 0 Supreme(P&H) 1173 to Sanjay Kumar and the related legal principles suggest these are treated as valid and applicable.
Treatment Patterns:
The majority of references treat Sanjay Kumar as a valid authority, with specific procedural principles reinforced.
The references to the case in relation to Section 468 Cr.P.C. and limitation issues show consistent reliance and application.
Uncertain / Ambiguous Treatment:
Some entries (e.g., Ashok Sureshchand Bal & others VS State of Maharashtra - 2001 0 Supreme(Bom) 886, REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES VS FAIR GROWTH AGENCIES LIMITED - 2006 0 Supreme(Kar) 335, Kuldeep Kumar Kohli VS Registrar of Companies for Delhi & Haryana - 2012 0 Supreme(Del) 2324, State of Maharashtra VS Abdul Jabbar Haji - 2012 0 Supreme(Bom) 1250, Sohan Singh VS State Of Punjab - 2018 0 Supreme(P&H) 4592, Mmg Health Care, Sirmour, Himachala Pradesh VS State at Instance of Drugs Inspector, Chikkaballapura Circle - 2019 0 Supreme(Kar) 240, Suresh Sood VS State of Himachal Pradesh (Drugs Inspector) - 2024 0 Supreme(HP) 298) mention Sanjay Kumar in passing or as part of a discussion but do not clearly indicate whether the case has been overruled, distinguished, or criticized. The context suggests continued relevance, but explicit treatment (e.g., criticism or overrule) is not evident.
The case MS. NILANJANA BHOWMICK vs RAVI NAIR - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Del) 9197 discusses limitations and references Sanjay Kumar but does not specify whether its treatment is positive or negative, making its treatment ambiguous.
Summary:
No cases are explicitly overruled or reversed based on the provided list.
Sanjay Kumar (supra) remains a significant and generally followed precedent in procedural and limitation issues.
There is no clear evidence of bad law treatment within this list.
Cases like Ashok Sureshchand Bal & others VS State of Maharashtra - 2001 0 Supreme(Bom) 886, REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES VS FAIR GROWTH AGENCIES LIMITED - 2006 0 Supreme(Kar) 335, Kuldeep Kumar Kohli VS Registrar of Companies for Delhi & Haryana - 2012 0 Supreme(Del) 2324, State of Maharashtra VS Abdul Jabbar Haji - 2012 0 Supreme(Bom) 1250, Sohan Singh VS State Of Punjab - 2018 0 Supreme(P&H) 4592, Mmg Health Care, Sirmour, Himachala Pradesh VS State at Instance of Drugs Inspector, Chikkaballapura Circle - 2019 0 Supreme(Kar) 240, Suresh Sood VS State of Himachal Pradesh (Drugs Inspector) - 2024 0 Supreme(HP) 298, and MS. NILANJANA BHOWMICK vs RAVI NAIR - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Del) 9197 have references to Sanjay Kumar but do not explicitly state their treatment, making their current legal standing uncertain based on this data.
The case REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES IN KARNATAKA, BANGALORE VS FAIRGROWTH AGENCIES LIMITED, BANGALORE - 2006 0 Supreme(Kar) 339 discusses State of Rajasthan v. Sanjay Kumar but does not clarify whether it follows or criticizes Sanjay Kumar, leaving treatment ambiguous.
The case Maziezokho Nisa Son of Kosievito Nisa VS T. R. Zeliang The Chief Minister of Nagaland Cm’s Residence cum Office Kohima, Nagaland - 2016 0 Supreme(Gau) 556 references Sanjay Kumar in the context of reliance but does not indicate whether Sanjay Kumar’s ruling has been questioned or upheld.
The case - 2025 Supreme(Online)(J&K) 834 cites Sanjay Kumar in the context of judgment but again does not clarify the treatment.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
