CURETECH FORMULATIONS PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY By the Court:- Heard the parties.

(2.) This Cr.M.P. has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with a prayer to quash the entire criminal proceeding including the order taking cognizance dtd. 16/5/2020 passed by learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-II, Ranchi in connection with Drugs and Cosmetics Case No.01 of 2020 in which cognizance of the offence punishable under Ss. 27 (b) (ii) and 27 (d) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 was taken, which is now pending in the court of learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-II, Ranchi.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner is a manufacturer of Neuro Gardian Tablet and Fit Eye Tablet but the petitioner does not have the license for manufacturing of the said drugs which were subsequently sold by the co-accused persons. Hence, it is alleged that the petitioner has inter alia committed the offences punishable under Ss. 27 (b) (ii) and 27 (d) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 and the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-II, Ranchi has taken cognizance of the said offences inter alia against the petitioner-company vide its order dtd. 16/5/2020 in Drugs and Cosmetics Case No.01 of 2020. It is next submitted that the petitioner-company has license under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 vide the copy of the license kept at Annexure- 1 and also the FSSAI License, the copy of which has been kept at Annexure-1/1 of this criminal miscellaneous petition. It is next submitted that even assuming for the sake of arguments that the petitioner does not have the license for manufacturing the said drugs but as in the strips of the medicines which has allegedly been produced by the petitioner-company, it has been conspicuously labelled with the words "not for medicinal use", hence, assuming for the sake of arguments that the said medicines manufactured by the petitioner-company are drugs falling under Clause (b) (i) of Sec. 3 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940, those medicines would fall under the exemption specified in "Schedule K" of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rule, 1945, since the same is not intended for medicinal use, hence, the same is exempted from the provisions of Chapter IV of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940. It is next submitted that the complainant- Drug Inspector has committed an illegality by not seizing the alleged medicines produced by the petitioner-company physically, hence, has not complied with the statutory requirement as mandated under Sec. 23 and 25 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940. Hence, the complaint suffers from manifest error. In this respect, the learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of the India in the case of Medicamen Biotech Limited & Another vs. Rubina Bose, Drug Inspector reported in (2008) 7 SC 196 paragraph-13 of which reads as under:-