MARC LABORATORIES LIMITED Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition, under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure (in short 'Cr.P.C.), has been filed for quashing of complaint filed by the Drug Inspector under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 (hereinafter referred to as 'Drugs Act') and Rules framed thereunder, which is pending adjudication before learned Judicial Magistrate. Learned counsel for the petitioners has canvassed for quashing of the complaint on four grounds.

(2.) Firstly, referring meaning of 'Inspector' prescribed under Section 3(e)(ii) of the Drugs Act, learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that Inspector Sushant Sharma, who has taken the sample and Inspector Munish Kakar, who has filed complaints, were not 'Inspectors' appointed in terms of Section 21 of the Drugs Act. According to him, notifications dated 29.10.2009 & 07.11.2013 of their appointment, placed on record as Annexures R-7 and R-8 with the reply, are not in consonance with provisions of Section 21 of the Drugs Act, as vide these notifications, though aforesaid Inspectors have been appointed by the Central Government for the purpose of the Drugs Act, but for whole of India without specifying the area assigned to them. Thus, these Inspectors were not competent to take sample and initiate criminal prosecution against petitioners under Section 32 of the Drugs Act.

(3.) To substantiate the aforesaid contentions, learned counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance upon judgments passed by the Bombay High Court in State of Maharashtra vs. R.A. Chandawarkar and others, 1999 CrLJ 4449; Telangana and Andhra Pradesh High Court in Johnson and Johnson Ltd., Himachal Pradesh and another vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and another,2015 1 DrugsCases(DC) 2; and Gauhati High Court in State of Nagaland and others vs. Bendangrenla, 2018 AIR(Gau) 59.