SUMIT LAL C SHAH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this petition, Under Section 482 of the Cr. PC, the accused petitioners have challenged the order of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bikaner dated May 18, 1980 by which cognizance against them and some other persons was taken for offences punishable Under Section 18/32 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and the Rules made thereunder, It was prayed that as the cognizance was wrongly taken, the aforesaid order be set aside and the proceedings laken there -under be quashed.

(2.) THE Drugs Inspector, Bikaner submitted a complaint against the eight accused -petitioners and six others in the court below on May 18, 1982. It was alleged therein that the Inspector visited one shop of M/s Bordia Medical Stores, Nokha on August 21, 1931. There he found Analgin -500 IP tablet prepared under label of Batch No. 118 with the manufacturing date of September, 1979. He suspscted the aforesaid medicine to be of substandard quality. He purchased the tablets for examination purpose from accused Kanhaiya Lal, Proprietor of M/s Bordia Medical Stores by making a payment of Rs. 54/ - in cash to him. The sample of the medicine was sent for examination to the Public Analyst, Rajasthan Jaipur. On test, the sample did not give positive identification for Analgin. It was alleged that the medicine was manufactured by accused M/s Fine Pharmaceutical Industries, Indore The accused -petitioners are partners in the said manufacturing industries. It was further alleged that M/s Bordia Medical Stores had purchased the aforesaid Analgin from M/s Rajesh Medical Agencies, Jodhpur of which accused Omprakash, Ummaidraj and Laxmandas were the partners. It was also alleged that M/s Rajesh Medical Agencies had purchased the Analgin from M/s Fine Pharmaceutical Industries, Indore. Since the Analgin was found of substandard quality, all the accused -petitioners had committed the offence the offence punishable Under Section 32 read with Section 18 of the Act. The learned Magistrate took cognizance and issued warrants with bail provision against the 14 accused -persons named in the complaint. Aggrieved against the said order, some of the accused -persons who own and hold partnership in M/s Fine Pharmaceutical Industries have come up in revision to this Court. I have heard the learned counsel for the accused petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor.

(3.) SECTION 177 of the Cr. PC lays down that every offence shall ordinarily be inquired into and tried by a court within whose local jurisdiction it was committed. This section is based on the general principle of law that all crime is local. Since the medicine was not manufactured by the accusedpetitioners within the limits of the local jurisdiction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bikaner, it could not be tried by him as against the accused -petitioners. Sections 178 and 179 are of no help to the prosecution. The medicine was not sold by the accused -petitioners to M/s Bordia Medical Stores at Nokha. The medicine was sold to M/s Bordia Medical Stores, Nokha by M/s Rajesh Medical Agencies, Jodhpur. The accused -petitioners nowhere come in picture in this sale.