BAWA SINGH Vs. THE STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE revision has been filed against the judgment of the Additional Sessions, Judge, Gurdaspur, dated 18th December, 1979, upholding the judgment of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gurdaspur, dated 21st April, 1979, convicting the petitioner under section 27 (a) (ii) read with section 18(c) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 250/ -, in default of payment of fine, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for three months

(2.) BRIEFLY , the prosecution case is that on 18th of October, 1976, Shri A.R. Salwan, Government Drugs Inspector, visited the shop of the petitioner. He, after disclosing his identity, expressed intention to inspect the shop. On making an enquiry whether the accused possessed licence for practising as a medical practitioner, he disclosed that he was registered with the Registrar, Ayurvedic and Unani Systems of Medicines, Haryana. On inspection, the Inspector found 200 tablets of aspirin manufactured by M/s. Sabala Laboratories, Amritsar, which he purchased on payment of Rs. 3.60. The tablets so purchased were divided by him into four portions which were made into four separate sealed parcels. One such portion of the sealed sample was sent to Government Analyst, Punjab, who gave the report that it was aspirin. After the receipt of the report, a complaint was presented by the Inspector in the Court under section 27(a) (ii) read with section 18(c) of the Act.

(3.) THE only contention of the Learned Counsel for the petitioner is that under section 18(c) of the Act, an offence is made out against a person if he stocks a drug for sale without obtaining a licence for that purpose. He submits that if the prosecution fails to show that the drug stocked is for sale, no offence under section 27(a)(ii) read with section 18(c) is made out. According to him, there is no evidence in this case that the petitioner had stocked the aspirin for sale and, therefore, it cannot be held that he committed the offence even though he had no licence.