KIRTI KUMAR JAYANTILAL PATEL Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. The petition is taken up for final hearing at the stage of admission with consent of the parties.

(2.) This petition is filed by the Director and Managing Director of petitioner No. 3 - company having license to manufacture for sale (for distribution) of drugs specified in Schedule C, C(1) excluding those specified in Schedule-X under the license No.G/28/1329 issued by the Commissioner of Food and Drugs Control Administration, Gujarat State. The respondent is the State of Maharashtra through the Drug Inspector, Nanded, Food and Drug Administration, Maharashtra. A challenge in this petition is to an order of issuance of process dtd. 16/1/2006 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nanded in a complaint in Special Case No.7 of 2015 (Old RCC No.12 of 2006).

(3.) The facts in short are that on 3/6/2005 the respondent drawn sample from drug store of Civil Hospital, Nanded of Mediplus Scalp vein set of size 20 having Batch No.26, manufactured on 1/10/2004 expiry date as 30/9/2007. Said sample was sent to analyst. The report dtd. 8/9/2005 from the analyst was received on 15/9/2005, wherein it was reported as "The Sample Does Not Comply with I.P. requirements for tests for Sterility as given in the protocol." The complainant after getting the report, gave one copy of the test report with notice under Sec. 18-A of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 (for short " DC Act") to disclose the name of supplier by letter dtd. 15/9/2005. The complainant received letter dtd. 16/9/2005 from the Pharmacist, Drug Store, Civil Hospital, Nanded disclosing name of accused No.1, who happens to be a distributor. Sanction from the Controlling Authority & Joint Commissioner, Food & Drugs Administration, M.S. Mumbai dtd. 23/9/2005 was obtained by the complainant. The complainant sent copy of test report and one sealed counter part of the sample to petitioner No.1 - company, by communication dtd. 4/10/2005. On receiving necessary information from the accused-company and after completing all the formalities, lodged complaint on 4/1/2006. On 16/1/2006 the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nanded passed following order :-