STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Vs. ARJUNDAS TEKCHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two appeals involve a common question of law and will, therefore, both be disposed of by this judgment.

(2.) THE respondents in both cases are medical practitioners at Umaria. They are not licencess under the provisions of the Drugs Rules as well as the Drugs Act for selling medicines specified in Schedule (c) of the Drugs Rules. The Assistant Surgeon Umaria, in his capacity as Inspector under the Drugs Act, on Inspecting the shops of the two respondents Harbaxrai and Arjundas, found certain medicines stocked in the almirah of each shop where the respondent in each case carried on his profession as a physician. These included the medicines mentioned in Schedule (c) of the Drugs Rules. The District Medical Officer Shahdol filed complaints against the respondents under Section 18 (a) (v) and (c) of the Drugs Act read with Section 27 of the Drugs Act, 1940. The Magistrate First Class Umaria, who tried the accused, acquitted the respondent. The State Government has now come up in appeal against the order of acquittal passed in each case.

(3.) IT was not disputed by the respondents (hat drugs mentioned in Schedule (c) of the Drugs Rules were seized from their possession, and that neither of them held a licence for stocking those medicines.