HANSA GAURI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS criminal misc. petition has been filed under section 482 Cr.P.C. by 12 petitioners named in the criminal misc. petition, as partners of Firm M/s Talent Gujarat, Kohinoor Industries Compound, Ahmedabad. Except petitioner No.6, who is the manufacturing Chemist Firm M/s Elite Pharma Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad.

(2.) THE short facts givingrise to this Cri. Misc. petition are that the Drug Inspector Mr. Rajesh Verma inspected the firm of present non-petitioner No.2 Smt. Nidhi, w/o Mr. Deepak Ganatra, on 12.05.1997m the presence of present non- petitioner No.4 and took the sample of Lorazepam Tablet. The information in Form No.17 was given and drug was purchased through Bill No.5388 dated 12.05.1997. The sample was divided into 4 equal quantity and same were sealed and one part of the sample was sent to the Government Analyst, Jaipur vide memorandum dated 13.05.1997 for chemical analysis and the Public Analyst, after examining the sample, sent the report in Form No.13 vide letter dated 02.03.1998. The drug inspector sent the copy of the report of the analysis to non-petitioner No.4 vide his letter dated 09.03.1999 which was given dasti to non-petitioner No.4 on 10.03.1998 and called for the record with regard to sale /purchase of the said medicine and also asked for recalling the distributed /sold stock. Again reminder was sent for non-compliance and, thereafter, the Drug Controller directed the Drug Inspector to collect all necessary documents of manufacturing Firm M/s Talent Gujarat, Ahmedabad.

(3.) IN the present case, it is admitted case of the prosecution that the expiry date of the sample was January 2000 as per seizure memo and no copy of the report of the Public Analyst was sent to the firm M/s Talent Gujarat and M/s Elite Fine Private Ltd. and only after appearing in the court on 28.06.2000, the petitioners had the first opportunity to request the court to send the sample to the Central Drugs Laboratory, under the provisions of section 25 (3) of the Act. Here it would be proper to refer to section 25 of the Act, which is as under :-