STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs. C B SHEELAVANTH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) in this case is whether annexures-a to e and g, which are instructions issued by the second-appellant are binding on the drug inspector, namely the respondent herein? He questioned the validity of these instructions on the ground that they were not legally authorised, in that one such instruction was to take prior permission of the drugs controller before any prosecution was launched against the alleged offenders of the drugs and cosmetics Act, 1940, hereinafter referred to as the act. The learned single judge concluded thus:

(2.) in opposition to this, the learned counsel for the respondent would submit that in an un- rcported judgment in sardar jaskaran singh v state of utter pradesh, cr. Revision No. 1816/1970, the Allahabad High Court held that for the prosecution launched against the alleged offenders, no sanction of the higher authorities is necessary. Therefore, the judgment of the learned single judge is correct.

(3.) on a careful consideration of the above argument, we are of the view that the learned single judge has not paid attention to the salient features of the act which have a bearing on the facts and circumstances of this case.