MAMAN CHAND JAIN Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has approached this Court by means of this petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'CrPC) , for quashing of FIR No. 22/2016, dated 13.03.2016, under Section 27 (c) read with Section 18(a) (i) , 17-B, 36AC of Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 (for short 'Drugs Act') and Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC') , registered at Police Station Kala Amb, District Sirmour, (HP) , against him and his wife Smt. Meenakshi Jain, mainly on the ground that only an Inspector or duly authorized gazetted officer of the Central Government or the State Government, or a person or a recognized consumer association, as provided in Section 32 of the Drugs Act, is competent to institute a prosecution for the offences committed under the Drugs Act and, as in the present case, the FIR has been registered and investigation is being carried out by the police officer(s) , who are not duly authorized to institute the prosecution under the Drugs Act, FIR as well as consequential proceedings/investigation being carried out by the police, is liable to be quashed and set aside.

(2.) It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that wife of the petitioner was licencee under the Drugs Act for manufacturing drugs and the petitioner was holder of power of attorney on her behalf, which had been revoked later on. It is also submitted that in a case investigated by a police officer, no other person except police officer would be competent and entitle to institute the prosecution and, therefore, the present investigation being carried out in pursuance to FIR No. 22/2016, despite the same being registered at the instance of the Assistant Drugs Controller, shall result into institution of prosecution in violation of the provisions of Section 32 of the Act and shall be bound to fail.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner has relied upon judgment of Patna High Court passed in Hindustan Lever Ltd. Versus State of Bihar, (1997) 1 BLJR 899, wherein FIR and investigation by police was quashed in similar facts and circumstances. It is apt to reproduce the relevant portion of para-3 of the aforesaid judgment herein:-