UNICURE INDIA PVT LTD Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition has been filed to quash the complaint in C.C.No.799 of 2009 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Pudukkottai.

(2.) THE long and short of the facts absolutely necessary and germane for the disposal of this petition would run thus: THE Drug Inspector filed the complaint before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Pudukkottai, on 13.07.2009, who after taking cognizance issued summons to the accused whereupon, they entered appearance and also filed the discharge application which was dismissed. Subsequently, this petition has been filed impugning and challenging the legality and maintainability of the complaint itself and to quash the same.

(3.) THE learned Counsel for the petitioners would put forth and set forth his arguments which could be succinctly and precisely set out thus: As per Section 25 (3) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940, within twenty eight days from the date of receipt of the copy of the Analyst's report, the accused should notify the Drugs Inspector or the Court before which any proceedings are pending in respect of the said sample to the effect that the accused intends to adduce evidence in controversion of the report. THE accused has also got the right to petition the Court after the complaint was filed so as to get it retested and the Court also has got power under sub-section (4) of Section 23 of the Act, to suo motu order for retesting by the Central Drugs Laboratory if not already tested by the said Laboratory. THE complainant has also got the right to request the Court to send it to the Central Drugs Laboratory for retesting. But, in this case, retesting was not done.