AMIT KUMAR VERMA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Mukhtar Alam, learned Counsel for the revisionist and learned A.G.A. for the State.

(2.) Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged which are on record.

(3.) The argument of learned Counsel for the revisionist is that under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940, Inspectors are only empowered to inspect the premises which deals in manufacture and sale of drugs or cosmetic by a licence holder. This is not disputed. The procedure to be adopted by the Inspector is provided in Section 23 of the said Act. It is specifically and unequivocally submitted by learned Counsel that there is no provision under the Act to enter into premises and effect seizure.