D P SONI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH these criminal miscellaneous petitions under Section 482 Cr. P. C. are directed against the order dated 8. 1. 2001 passed by the additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 3, Jodhpur (for short, 'the trial Court' hereinafter) in Criminal Regular Case No. 5/2001, whereby the trial Court took cognizance of the offences under Section 17a read with Section 18a of the drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 (for short, 'the Act' hereinafter ). Both the petitions involved common question of law and facts and arise out of the same order, therefore, with the consent of the parties, they are being heard and decided by this common order.

(2.) I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the Public Prosecutor for the State. Perused the order impugned.

(3.) IT is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that in the complaint filed by the Drugs Inspector, Jodhpur against the firm M/s. Jain Medicals and Ors. , the petitioners have been shown as the Directors of the firm but there is no averment that the petitioners were the in-charge of the company and also responsible for the conduct of company's business. Learned counsel has relied on the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana v. Brij Lal Mittal and Ors. and S. M. S. Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Neeta Bhalla and Anr. Learned counsel further submits that Section 34 of the Act provides the offences by a company. Sub-section (1) of Section 34 provides that where an offence under this Act has been committed by a company, every person who at the time the offence was committed, was in-charge of, and was responsible to the company for the conduct of the business of the company, as well as the company shall be deemed to be guilty of the offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly.