VIJAY KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners are seeking quashment of complaint Annexure P-1 filed under sections 18(1)(i) read with section 27(b)(i), 27(c) and 27(d) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 (in short, the 'Act').

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that complainant is a duly appointed Drug Inspector under the Act. Petitioners (accused No. 1) are drug manufacturers. M/s Soni Medical Agencies, Ladwa, is a wholesale drug licensee firm. On July 9, 1993, Shri Ashok Bhamba, the then Drug Inspector, inspected the premises of M/s Soni Medical Agencies and a sample No. AKB-48/93 of Chloroamphenicol Capsule I.P. Batch No. GC-50, Ex. P. Nov. 94 manufactured by the petitioners-accused No. 1 was taken for analysis. As per the procedure laid down in the Act, it was divided into four portions. One portion of the sample was given to the partner of Messrs Soni Medical Agencies, from whom the sample was taken. Another portion of the sample was sent to the Government Analyst Haryana. On analysis the sample was declared not of standard quality vide test report dated August 31, 1993.

(3.) M /s Vinay Medicine Traders, Saharanpur, is a wholesale drug licensed firm. Notice dated October 7, 1993, was sent to them. They disclosed that they have purchased this drug from M/s Dass Medical Store, Meerut, vide their bill No. 25927 dated May 2, 1993.