NAVANEETH K.UNNI Vs. STATE PREPRESENTED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is the 1st accused in C.C.No.2914/2015 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Chavakkad. He seeks to quash all proceedings against him in the above case. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Ss. 18(c) and 22(1)(cca) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 ('the Act' for short).

(2.) The proceedings in C.C.No.2914/2015 arose out of a private complaint filed by the Drugs Inspector on the basis of information received from Sri.P.P.Jomon, who alleged that petitioner is a 'fraud Doctor' practicing Homeopathy after stocking and selling Homeopathic medicines from the premises of 'M/s Panacea Homeo Clinic', Vadanappilly Junction, Thrissur without any authority. Pursuant to the complaint, the Drugs Inspector conducted an enquiry which revealed that bills of homeopathic medicines were kept in the clinic, without the accused having any drug license nor any qualification to practice as a Medical Practitioner. The complaint also alleged that the accused registered himself as a homeopath on 10/6/2013 and hence the purchase and storing of medicines prior to that date was without authority and contrary to provisions of Sec. 18(c) of the Act. It was also alleged that accused had procured homeopathic medicines in violation of Sec. 22(1)(cca) of the Act and thereby committed the offences alleged.

(3.) Smt.Reena Abraham, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that, the petitioner is a Homeopathic Practitioner duly registered on 10/6/2013 and that the inspection was conducted only on 15/7/2013, wherein, the medicines purchased prior to his registration as a Homeopathic Practitioner were allegedly seized. It was submitted that even if the entire allegations in the complaint are assumed to be admitted, still none of the offences are made out as petitioner's father himself was a Homeopathic Medical Practitioner and that the Clinic was being conducted prior to 10/6/2013 and after 10/6/2013, by petitioner's father. According to the learned counsel, the fact that petitioner's father was a Homeopathic Medical Practitioner even on the date of inspection is admitted as is evident from Annexure-A4, which is not even disputed and therefore, the homeopathic medicines purchased and stored in 'Panacea Homeo Clinic' cannot be said to be procured illegally or in violation of the Act.