SEARLE INDIA LIMITED Vs. THE STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE accused 1 and 2, M/s. Searle India Limited Dr. K.K. Maheswari, have preferred the appeal, while the accused 3 to 7 have preferred revisions out of the same judgment rendered by the Special Judge (Essential Commodities Act, Madras, in STC No.2 of 1987).

(2.) WHEN the matter was about to be heard, it came to light that the accused 3 to 7 have preferred revisions instead of appeal. The counsel for the accused 3 to 7 pleaded that due to inadvertence, it has been done so and requested that as the accused 1 and 2 have preferred an appeal against conviction, the revisions also should be heard alongwith them and they may be treated as appeals.

(3.) THE accused were charged for violation of Para -20 of The Drugs (Price Control) Order 1979, punishable under Section 7(l)(a)(ii) of the Essential Commodities Act read with Section 3(2)(c) of the said Act. In effect the offending part is only Paragraph 20 of The Drugs (Price Control) Order 1979 and the other sections relate only to the Penal Clause.