RASHPAL Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Crl. Misc. No. 19027 of 2013 Application is allowed and Annexure P-2 is taken on record.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been held while he was having 2500 tablets of Microlit. According to him, the tablets of Microlit are having the salts of Diphenoxylate Hydrochloride 2.3 mg per tablet and Atropine Sulphate .022 mg per tablet. According to him, this preparation is covered by entry no.58 of Notification no. SO.826(E) dated 14.11.1985. According to him, the petitioner is in custody since 20.3.2012. Crl. Misc. No.M-31890 of 2013 =2= Learned State counsel, on the other hand, while filing the report of Review Committee submits that the petitioner was not having a valid drug licence and purchase bills and therefore prosecution under the Act is legal.

(3.) The report of the Review Committee filed today mentions that the contraband material i.e. Microlit tablets contained two salts, named, Diphenoxylate Hydrochloride and Atropine Sulphate. The report itself admits that the material falls in entry no.58 of the above mentioned notification. Only for the fact that the petitioner did not have a valid drug licence and purchase bills, it is recommended that he be prosecuted under the Act.