LAWS(BOM)-2014-7-377

GALPHA LABORATORIES LTD. Vs. COMMISSIONER, FDA, MUMBAI

Decided On July 09, 2014
Galpha Laboratories Ltd. Appellant
V/S
Commissioner, Fda, Mumbai Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The application is made for transfer of 17 cases pending in various Courts to a Court in Mumbai or Navi Mumbai. The applicant is a manufacturer and distributor of medicine and pharmaceutical products having its office at Village Thana Baddi, Himachal Pradesh. Respondent No.1 is the head of Food and Drugs Administration. The Inspector working in the said Department had inspected various shops and took samples of the drug i.e., 'Solufer XT', 'Fefazin XT', 'Hi Fe XT' under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 and the Rules made thereunder. As the respondent No.1 found that there is violation of the rules and certain offences are committed under the Act, the concerned Inspector of the respective place lodged complaint against the applicant. Thus, complaints have been lodged against the applicant/accused at various places in Maharashtra. As on today, 17 cases are pending against the applicant in various Courts in Maharashtra. Hence, the application is made by the applicant under section 407 of the Criminal Procedure Code that all these cases are to be transferred preferably and in Mumbai or in Navi Mumbai.

(2.) Learned Counsel for the applicant/accused has submitted that if the cases are transferred to one Court, then the applicant is ready to bear the travel expenses of the panchas and of the independent witnesses, if any, to be summoned and examined. He submitted that the applicant is based in Himachal Pradesh and it is difficult for him to attend to various Courts in Maharashtra at 17 places.

(3.) Learned APP, on instructions received from Shri V.A. Kose, Drug Inspector, who is present in Court, submitted that if the cases in Mumbai region are clubbed before the Court of a Metropolitan Magistrate, Mumbai and as the applicant is ready to bear the travel expenses of the panchas and witnesses, then, the respondent No.1 has no objection. She further submitted that however, all the inspector shall not be called on one day by the Court as it will cause a lot of inconvenience in the functioning of the Department.