BISHAMBER NATH Vs. DRUGS LICENSING AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This partnership firm styled 'Gobind Medical Hall' held four licences under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940. The constitution of the firm changed in or about April, 1971 by including the petitioner as a partner. Owing to the change in the constitution new licsnces were issued on or about the 27th May, 1971 in Forms 20, 21, 20-B and 21-B as per the rules made under the said Act. (Copies of those licencees are Annexurcs A.B.C and D to the Writ Petition). The licences in Forms 20 and 21 are for authorised retail sales; licences in Forms 20-B and 21-B are for wholesale dealings in respect of drugs mentioned. The licences in Forms 20 and 20-B are for drugs which include those coming under the definition of other than biological and other special products, whereas the licences in Forms 20-B and 21-B include drugs coming within the definition of biological and special products as defined in the Rules. "Novalgin" falling within the category of Schedule drugs (manufactured by M/s. Hoechst Pharmacsuticals Ltd., Bombay) is covered by licences in Form 20 and could not therefore, be sold AUTHORITY & ANOTHER in retail except on the prescription of a Registered Medical Practitioner. All the licences were issued to the petitioner on 27.5.1971 which were valid up to 31.12.1971.

(2.) On 16.10.1971 the Drugs Inspector (Shri V. B. Bajpai) inspected A the premises where the petitioner carried on business and found 186 strips of 10 tablets of Novalgin B. No. DLA bearing the label of M/s. Hoechst Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Bombay and in addition to the under-mentioned 80x10 strips. Shri BishamberNath (petitioner) was, according to the Drugs Inspector present at the shop at that time.

(3.) On 20.10.1971 the Inspector of Drugs issued a Memorandum to the petitioner firm stating that out of the above 186 strips of 10 tablets each of Novalgin (of the above description plus 80 strips of 10 tablets each out of which samples consisting of 4 x 10 strips of both the Batches were taken for test and analysis after giving an intimation to Shri Bishambar Nath in Form No. 17. The remaining stocks of Novalgin had been seized and a receipt also given to Shri Bishambar Nath, but he could not produce, when demanded, the purchase bill for the two Batches of Novalgin tablets. By the said Memorandum the firm was required to disclose the names, addresses and other particulars of the persons from whom the said drugs were acquired within seven days of the receipt of that Memorandum. In the reply, sent by Shri Bishamber Nath on behalf of the petitioner-firm (dated 28.10.1971) he had mentioned that 80 strips of 10 tablets each of Batch No. DUC were purchased from National Pharmacy, Bhagirath Palace, Delhi Vide Bill which was undertaken to be produced when required and that 186 x 10 strips of Navalgin had been offered for sale by one S. Harjeet Singh son of Teja Singh resident of Nehru Gali, Gandhi Nagar, Delhi, who had stated that he was the agent of an authorised stockist and when asked to give the bill he promised to give the bill later and accept payment. Immediately thereafter the premises were raided. The position taken was that these tablets (186 x 10) were not exhibited or intended for sale.