Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Analysis and Conclusion:Arrests related to violations of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act are primarily carried out by Drug Inspectors, who possess statutory powers for search, seizure, and prosecution. Police officers have limited authority and can only arrest under specific circumstances, often requiring cooperation with Drug Inspectors and adherence to procedural safeguards. Cases demonstrate that proper legal procedures, including obtaining warrants and following sampling protocols, are essential to uphold the legality of arrests and prosecutions under the Act ["Ramraj Choudhury VS State Of West Bengal - Calcutta"].
In the pharmaceutical and cosmetics industry, compliance with regulatory laws is crucial. A common query arises: arrest related to drug and cosmetic act—specifically, who has the authority to make such arrests? Many face confusion when police intervene in matters under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 (D&C Act). This post clarifies the legal framework, emphasizing that arrests must typically be executed by authorized Inspectors, not police officers acting independently. Understanding these distinctions can prevent illegal actions and protect rights.
We'll explore the Act's provisions, court interpretations, and practical implications. Note: This is general information based on legal precedents and statutes; consult a qualified lawyer for specific advice.
The D&C Act vests powers of arrest, search, and seizure primarily in Inspectors or specifically empowered persons, not arbitrarily by police. Police generally lack direct authority unless instructed by Inspectors. This stems from the Act's scheme to ensure specialized handling of drug and cosmetic offenses. Keshav Kumar VS State of U. P. - 2024 0 Supreme(All) 50INDIAN SOAPS & TOILETRIES MAKERS ASSOCIATION VS OZAIR HUSAIN - 2013 2 Supreme 331
Key points include:- Only Inspectors or authorized officers can arrest, search, and seize. Keshav Kumar VS State of U. P. - 2024 0 Supreme(All) 50INDIAN SOAPS & TOILETRIES MAKERS ASSOCIATION VS OZAIR HUSAIN - 2013 2 Supreme 331- Police cannot independently investigate or prosecute unless empowered. Keshav Kumar VS State of U. P. - 2024 0 Supreme(All) 50- Section 32 restricts court cognizance to prosecutions initiated by Inspectors, not police. Keshav Kumar VS State of U. P. - 2024 0 Supreme(All) 50
Sections 21 and 22 outline Inspectors' duties. They can inspect premises, take samples, search, seize, and arrest without warrant for Chapter IV offenses (e.g., adulterated or spurious drugs/cosmetics). Section 22(1)(c) explicitly allows arrest if necessary during official duties. Keshav Kumar VS State of U. P. - 2024 0 Supreme(All) 50INDIAN SOAPS & TOILETRIES MAKERS ASSOCIATION VS OZAIR HUSAIN - 2013 2 Supreme 331
For instance, Inspectors may stop and search any vehicle, vessel or other conveyance which, he has reason to believe, is being used for carrying any drug or cosmetic in respect of which an offence under this Chapter has been, or is being, committed. KULDEEP SINGH VS STATE OF U. P. - 2014 Supreme(All) 729
This specialized role ensures expertise in testing standards, as seen in cases involving sub-standard cosmetics like absorbent cotton wool, classified under Section 3. Om Surgical Industries VS State of Bihar - 2024 Supreme(Pat) 1153
Police officers do not have independent powers. They cannot register FIRs under Cr.P.C. Section 154 for cognizable offenses under Chapter IV without Inspector direction. Section 32 mandates prosecutions by Inspectors, gazetted officers, or aggrieved persons. Keshav Kumar VS State of U. P. - 2024 0 Supreme(All) 50
In one case, The police lacked authority to investigate and seize under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, rendering the FIR invalid due to absence of essential elements of the alleged offences. Gaurav Chawla VS State of U. T. Chandigarh - 2023 Supreme(P&H) 1672 The court quashed the FIR, noting police exceeded jurisdiction in raiding and seizing banned injections. Gaurav Chawla VS State of U. T. Chandigarh - 2023 Supreme(P&H) 1672
Another ruling affirmed: Police cannot investigate offences under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act; only authorized inspectors can conduct such investigations. Gaurav Chawla VS State of U. T. Chandigarh - 2023 Supreme(P&H) 1672
Police may assist Inspectors but cannot act alone. Independent arrests or probes may be challenged as illegal. INDIAN SOAPS & TOILETRIES MAKERS ASSOCIATION VS OZAIR HUSAIN - 2013 2 Supreme 331
The Supreme Court in Ashok Kumar Sharma stressed that for Chapter IV offenses, only Inspectors investigate and prosecute. Police lack independent authority; FIRs must be by Inspectors. Arrest powers are with Inspectors unless authorized otherwise. Keshav Kumar VS State of U. P. - 2024 0 Supreme(All) 50
High Courts echo this. In a quashing petition, the court held essential elements of cheating (IPC Sections 420, 120-B) absent, and police seizure under D&C Act unauthorized. Gaurav Chawla VS State of U. T. Chandigarh - 2023 Supreme(P&H) 1672
In anticipatory bail matters, courts noted FIRs by police contravene Section 32, as in a case where drugs were seized but not used, granting bail due to procedural flaws. P. K. Mehta @ Pawan Kumar Mehta VS State Of Jharkhand - 2017 Supreme(Jhk) 1702
For sub-standard cosmetics, cognizance requires expert reports and notifications; mechanical orders without judicial mind are set aside. Om Surgical Industries VS State of Bihar - 2024 Supreme(Pat) 1153
Police may act if offenses violate other laws (e.g., IPC, Essential Commodities Act), but for pure D&C Act breaches, Inspectors prevail. Keshav Kumar VS State of U. P. - 2024 0 Supreme(All) 50
Penalties under Sections 18(a)(i), 27(d) for sub-standard or adulterated items apply, but procedures like sample sealing (Rule 57) must be followed, or proceedings vitiate. Gaba Pharmaceuticals Private Limited VS Union of India - 2015 Supreme(AP) 508
Accused rights, like Section 25(4) for Central Drugs Lab analysis, must not be infringed by delayed complaints post-expiry. M. S. Theivendran VS State of Maharashtra - 2014 Supreme(Bom) 2370
NDPS Act distinctions arise; some drugs fall under D&C Act if not psychotropic salts. Ram Nath VS State of Punjab - 2011 Supreme(P&H) 379
In practice, violations like non-standard cosmetics require specific adulteration notifications. Om Surgical Industries VS State of Bihar - 2024 Supreme(Pat) 1153
Staying compliant avoids pitfalls. For tailored guidance, seek legal counsel. This framework promotes public health via expert enforcement.
References:- Keshav Kumar VS State of U. P. - 2024 0 Supreme(All) 50: Supreme Court on Inspector powers/police limits.- INDIAN SOAPS & TOILETRIES MAKERS ASSOCIATION VS OZAIR HUSAIN - 2013 2 Supreme 331: Sections 21, 22, 32 provisions.- Other cases as cited.
#DrugsAndCosmeticsAct #ArrestUnderDCA #DrugLawIndia
and Cosmetic Act or the rule made there under'. ... It has further been argued that 'phensedyl' is a therapeutic drug, covered and controlled under the provisions Drugs and Cosmetic Act, 1945. ... to those under the Drugs and Cosmetic Act, 1945. ... He says that codeine is for the therapeutic usage and is controlled under the provisions of the Drug and Cosmetic Act, 1945. Contravention thereof and the contravener s....
- [(1) For the purposes of this Chapter, the expression “standard quality” means— (a) in relation to a drug, that the drug complies with the standard set out in [the Second Schedule], and (b) in relation to a cosmetic, that the cosmetic ... (iii) whether the Drug Inspector has power or authority to arrest a person in connection with an offence under Chapter IV of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940? 8. ... The coordinate bench of this court clarified that there is no l....
In the Drugs Act, 1940, there are penal provisions in Section 18(a)(i) and 27(d) but 18(a)(i) deals with the matter of a drug which is not of a standard quality and 27(d) deals with the penal provision in respect of a drug which is manufactured, sold, or distributed, or stocked or exhibited in contravention ... The Absorbent Cotton Wool which has been supplied by the petitioners to the concerned hospital comes in the purview of a cosmetic article in view of the definition of cosmetic given in Section 3 ....
] or spurious drug or misbranded or spurious cosmetic,] such drug or, as the case may be, such cosmetic shall be liable to confiscation.] ... That, on 12.09.2022 Respondent No.2 seized the goods and issued Form-16 On 12.09.2022, Respondent No.2 seized the goods and issued Form-16 under The Drug and Cosmetic Act, 1940 being 16 light wooden color drum labeled as 4s Progesterone (Appro. ... a) there has been added thereto some innocuous substance or ingredient because th....
or cosmetic is being manufactured and the means employed for standardising and testing the drug or cosmetic; (ii) any premises wherein any drug or cosmetic is being sold, or stocked or exhibited or offered for sale, or distributed; (b) take samples of any ... or cosmetic in respect of which an offence under this Chapter has been, or is being, committed, and order in writing the person in possession of the drug or cosmetic in respect of which the offe....
stock or exhibit or offer for sale or distribute any drug or cosmetic in contravention of any provisions under the Act or rules made thereunder. ... Alprazolam is currently listed as Schedule H1 drug under Drugs and Cosmetic Rules, 1945 (as amended by (Seventh Amendment) Rules, 2022). ... Furthermore, Section 18(c) of the D&C Act reads as follows: “(c) [manufacture for sale or for distribution, or sell, or stock or exhibit or offer for sale] or distribute any drug [or....
Reports of Government Analysts.—(1) The Government Analyst to whom a sample of any drug or cosmetic has been submitted for test or analysis under sub-section (4) of Section 23, shall deliver to the Inspector submitting it a signed report in triplicate in the prescribed form. ... It is further submitted that nowhere in the instant Criminal Miscellaneous Petition, the petitioner-company has admitted that the products manufactured by it is a drug and in the absence of that it cannot take the plea that the same comes under the Schedule K of t....
Lastly, arrest warrant have been issued against the petitioners. ... According to the learned counsel, Section 19 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 ('the Act', rescue of the petitioner. ... Therefore, Section 19 of the Act does not come to the rescue of the petitioner at this stage. ... (or cosmetic) in respect of which the offence has been committed or of the circumstances of its p style="position:absolute;
of 2017 registered for the offence punishable under section 420 of the and 440 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking anticipatory bail as that the drugs sized during inspection were purchased by the petitioner and all the bills and other related
& Cosmetic Act is made out. ... It was further stated thaqt Section 17B of Drug & Cosmetic Act to case of spurious drug, rather the report indicates that it is same Act, and complaint under Section 28A of the Drug and Cosmetics Act 1940, in contravention of the Section 18B of the same Act and was taken cognizance, hence the
Anant Bijay Singh, J. – Petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Sadar P.S. Case No. 233 / 2016 corresponding to G.R. No. 1640/2016, registered under Section 18 (C)(A) and Section 27 (b)(ii) of the Drugs & Cosmetic Act, 1940 read with Drugs and Cosmetic Rules, 1945 and Section 420 of the I.P.C., lodged on the basis of one written report given by Bikash Kumar, Drug Inspector, Palamau.
Penalty for manufacture, sale, etc., of drugs in contravention of this Chapter – whoever, himself or by any other person on his behalf, manufactures for sale or for distribution, or sells, or stocks or exhibits or offers for sale or distributes – (a) any drug deemed to be adulterated under section 17A or spurious under section 17B or which when used by any person for or in the diagnosis, treatment, mitigation, or prevention of any disease or disorder is likely to cause his death or is likely to cause such harm on his body as would amount to grievous hurt within the meaning of section 320 of ....
In the circumstances, what the court was required to do has been provided under Section 25(4) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940. As such in the present case, since the sample had already not been tested or analyzed by the Central Drugs Laboratory, it was required to be sent to the said laboratory by the Magistrate on its own accord or on the application made either by the applicants or by respondent No.2. The court is under obligation to cause the sample of drug or cosmetic produced before it under sub-section (4) of section 23 of the Act to send for test or analysis. Th....
(iii) stop and search any vehicle, vessel or other conveyance which, he has reason to believe, is being used for carrying any drug or cosmetic in respect of which an offence under this Chapter has been, or is being, committed, and order in writing the person in possession of the drug or cosmetic in respect of which the offence has been, or is being, committed, not to dispose of any stock of such drug or cosmetic for a specified period not exceeding twenty days, or, unless the alleged offence is such that the defect may be removed by the possessor of the drug or cosmetic, seize the ....
Accused deserved to be charge under Drug & Cosmetic Act, 1940. As a result of above, I hold that no offence under the provisions of NDPS Act is made out against the petitioners. “ Do not attract the provision of NDPS Act 1985 because psychotropic substance salts are not found in recovered medicines.
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
