RAMA NAND SHARMA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rama Nand Sharma has referred this application in revision against the order, dated 16th March, 1972, of Shri M. M. Sharan Additional Sessions Judge, Meerut, allowing the appeal in part, by maintaining the conviction of the applicant under Sec. 27 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act (hereinafter called the Act) and sentencing him to 18 months' rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000.00 and, in default of payment of fine, to undergo nine month's rigorous imprisonment as ordered by the learned Magistrate.

(2.) It appears that the complaint was filed by the Drugs Inspector against Ganpat Singh, said to be the proprietor of M/s Ganesh Medical Stores, Rama Nand Sharma, the applicant, said to be in-charge of Ganesh Medical Stores and Ganesh Medical Stores itself under Sec. 27 of the Act for violating the provisions of Rule 65(3) of the Rules framed under the Act and for not complying with conditions Nos. 3 and 4 of the drugs licence in form 20 and condition No. 5 in form 21. The allegations were that the accused used to issues bogus cash memo to Central Government employees for the purpose of reimbursement, that the carbon copies of the said cash memo and the purchase records of the drugs sold were not produced, and that the same did not seem to have been maintained as required under the provisions of the Act and Rules 65 of the Rules framed under the Act. It was also stated in the complaint that Shri Hari Datt Sharma, the approved, qualified person, never worked with the said firm, that Rama Nand Sharma, the applicant, who was unapproved unqualified person under the Rules, went on selling drugs and signing the sale records, kept under Rule 65(3) of the Rules, without reporting to the licensing authority any change in the qualified staff in-charge. A charge was framed against Kama Nand Sharma alone, and the other accused mentioned in the complaint were not proceeded with.

(3.) Rama Nand Sharma, the applicant, denied the allegations made against him. His main defence was that he had no concern with this medical stores and he was merely a clerk in the said stores. In his statement under Sec. 342, Code of Criminal Procedure, he attributed his false implication due to enmity. Virendra Singh Tyagi (D.W. 1) was examined in support of the defence.