AMERY PHARMACEUTICALS Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition under Section 482 Cr. P. C. for quashing the criminal proceedings pending against the petitioners before the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate (Communal Riots), Kota, in criminal cases No. 2160/92 State vs. Chetan Medicals & Ors.-U/ss. 27 (B) 1, 27 (C) and 27 (D) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940) (for short `the Act of 1940 ). By his order dated 23. 11. 95 the learned Magistrate framed charges for the aforesaid offences against the petitioners and such order of the learned Magistrate has also been confirmed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge No. 4, Kota in exercise of his revisional powers under Section 397 Cr. P. C.

(2.) SINCE the legality and validity of the order of the learned Magistrate was noticed to have been examined by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge in his concurrent revisory jurisdiction and a second revision of the same order is barred by the provisions U/s. 397 (2) Cr. P. C. I heard the learned counsel for the parties with a view to know and satisfy myself as to whether it is a fit case to exercise the powers of this court under Sec. 482 Cr. P. C. After examining the relevant orders, I am satisfied that the case involves no abuse of the process of the court of the learned Magistrate and his order occasions no injustice to the petitioner.

(3.) A combined reading of Sections 18a, 19 (3), 23 (4) (iii) and Sec. 25 (2) discloses that every person who is not the manufacturer of the drug or cosmetic or his agent for distribution thereof, is under a statutory obligation to disclose, when so required, to the Drugs Inspector the name, address and other particulars of the person from whom he acquired the drug or cosmetic. Once such a person discharges his obligation U/s. 18a, Sec. 23 (4) (iii) r. w. Sec. 25 (2) makes it obligatory upon the Drugs Inspector to send one of the samples to the person whose name, address and other particulars have been disclosed by the seller of the drug or cosmetics U/s. 18a alongwith a copy of the report of the Govt. Analyst. Sub-sec. (3) of Section 23 requires the Drugs Inspector to divide the sample, purchased by him from the seller, into, at the most, four portions and effectively seal and suitably mark them. Of the four samples, one is to be restored to the seller, the second to be sent to the Govt. Analyst for chemical examination, the third to be produced in the court, in case a complaint is filed, and the fourth, where taken, is to be sent to the person whose name, address and other particulars have been disclosed upon the Drugs Inspector U/s. 18a. The delivery of the samples by the Drugs Inspector to different persons/authorities in that manner clearly suggests that the fourth sample alongwith the copy of the report of the Govt. Analyst is to be sent or delivered to either the manufacturer of the drugs or cosmetics or to his agent for distribution thereof and not to both. This position has been made quite clear by the legislature by use of the expression "not being the manufacturer of a drug or cosmetics or his agent for distribution thereof" in the language of Section 18a itself. This interpretation also fits in the scheme underlying Sections 18a, 19, 23 and 25 of the Act 1940. It is, therefore, held that the fourth portion of the sample of the drug or cosmetic is to be delivered, sent or forwarded alongwith the report of the Govt. Analyst by the Drugs Inspector either to the manufacturer of the drug or cosmetic or his agent for distribution thereof and not to both.