VENKATESWARA RAO Vs. STATE OF AP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner herein-A.1 along with four others was tried as accused in C.C.No.185 of 1997 on the file of the II Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Eluru, for the offences punishable under sections 18 (c) and 18-A r/w 27(b)(ii) and 28 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 (for short "the Act"). During the course of trial, on behalf of the prosecution, P.Ws.l to 3 were examined and Exs.P.l to P.11 and M.O.I were marked. No oral or documentary evidence was adduced on behalf of the accused. The learned Magistrate having assessed the entire evidence came to the conclusion that the other accused i.e. A.2 to A.5 are not guilty of the charges for which they were tried, but however, found the petitioner-A.l guilty of the charges for which he was tried, and accordingly, convicted and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one month for the offence punishable under Section 18(c) r/w 27(b)(ii) of the Act, and further sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for one month for the offence punishable u/s 18(a) r/w 28 of the Act, by judgment dated 06/12/1999. As against the said judgment, the petitioner-A.l filed Crl.A.No.266 of 1999 on the file of the Sessions Judge, West Godavari District at Eluru and the same was dismissed on 31.03.2004. Being aggrieved by the same, petitioner-A.l filed this Revision.

(2.) For the purpose of convenience and to avoid ambiguity in discussion, the parties are referred to hereinafter as they were arrayed in C.C.No.185 of 1997.

(3.) Briefly, the allegations of the complaint are that A.1 is an allopathic medical practitioner in Vasavi Clinic, Pedavegi, West Godavari District and engaged in sale and distribution of drugs without possessing valid drug licence. A.2 is a clerk in the firm of A.3 and A.3 firm is in possession of valid drug licence under the Act. A.2 sold drugs to A.1 in violation of licence rules and procedure of the Act. A.4 is partner of A.5 firm. A.5 firm is having valid licence for sale and storage of drugs. i) On 19/07/1996 P.W.I, the Drugs Inspector, Eluru, raided the clinic of A.1 and found that A.l was in possession of huge quantity of drugs without any licence and seized all the drugs in the presence of mediators. During the course of seizure, A.l handed over the invoices issued by A.3 firm and A.5 firm. A.3 issued the invoices in the name of Dr. Ravi Kumar. Pursuant thereto, P.W.I verified the records of A.3 firm and A.5 firm on 01.08.1996 and 30.08.1996 respectively and confirmed the sale of medicines to A.1 by the said firms. The petitioner also could not reveal where he obtained certain items of drugs violating Section 18(a) of the Act. Thus, A.2 violated Section 18(a) (iv) r/w conditions of licence under Sec.20(b) and 21(b)which is punishable under Section 27(a) of the Act. Similarly, A.4 also violated Section 18(a) (vi) r/w conditions of licence under Section 20(b) and 21(b) of the Act which is punishable under Section 27(b) of the Act. Hence, the Drugs Inspector, Eluru, filed the complaint.