Madhya Pradesh High Court
M/S Glaxo India Limited (Now Known As ... vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 12 August, 2014
M.cr.C. No.9575/2014
12.08.2014
Shri S.C. Bagadiya, learned Sr. Counsel with Shri Kapil
Jain, Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri G.S. Thakur, P.L. for the respondent/State.
Heard finally with the consent of learned counsel for
the parties.
This is a petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. filed
by the petitioner being aggrieved by the order dated
23.05.2014, whereby the learned trial Court has dismissed
the application filed by the petitioner under Section 311 of
Cr.P.C.
Facts in short, giving rise to this petition are that
petitioner alongwith other co-accused persons are facing a trial under Section 18(1)(1) read with Section 27-D of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 before Chief Judicial Magistrate, Raisen. During the trial, petitioner has filed an application under Section 311 of Cr.P.C., interalia contended that Drugs Controller General of India has wrote a letter dated 06.08.1996 (Annexure P-5), wherein it was specifically directed to the Drug Contoller, Bhopal that for uniformity of content under monograph on Betamethasone Tablets be analysed under IP 1996. It is further directed that I.P.1996 will come into force w.e.f. 1.12.1996. Despite the aforesaid letter, the Drug Controller has analysed the sample under IP 85 and the report of analyst was prepared on 25.01.1997. Therefore the petitioner has prayed that Shri Komal Singh, the then Controller Food and Drug Administration, Govt. of M.P. and Shri P. Das Gupta, the then Drug Controller General of India be called as court witnesses. The aforesaid application was dismissed by the trial Court. Hence this petition.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that despite specific directions, the Drug Controller of M.P. has not followed the aforesaid direction. In these circumstances, it is necessary in the interest of justice to call aforesaid witnesses to impart justice. The Trial Court has committed an illegality in passing the impugned order. It is, therefore prayed that the impugned order be set aside or modified.
It is further submitted that this matter was previously came before this court for quashment of charges under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. in M.Cr.C. No.5043/2012, wherein it was observed by this court that this point shall remain opened for consideration, whether Indian Pharmacopoeia 1985 is applicable in this matter or Indian Pharmacopoeia 1996. It is further submitted that after disposal of aforesaid petition on 24.01.2013, the petitioner has filed an application under Section 311 of the Cr.P.C. before the trial Court, the same was dismissed by the trial Court.
I have perused the impugned order dated 23.05.2014 alongwith the letter dated 01.12.1996 and the report of Public Analyst dated 25.01.1997 (P-6). Since the Indian Pharmacopoeia 1996 came into force w.e.f. 1.12.1996 and report of Public Analyst was prepared on 25.01.1997, it shows that the Drug Controller had not carried out the analysis of the same under I.P. 1996 and the same was carried out under I.P.85. Since the point remained opened for consideration whether Indian Pharmacopoeia 1985 is applicable in this matter or Indian Pharmacopoeia 1996. In this way, this point goes to the root of the case. Considering the aforesaid aspect of the case, the trial Court has committed an illegality in passing the impugned order.
The petition is partly allowed. The order passed by the trial Court is modified to the following extent :-
The trial Court is directed to call the witnesses namely:-
(1) Dr. P. Das Gupta, then then Drug Controller General of India, if he is available. In case, he is not available, then other officer of the aforesaid office alongwith the record of the letter dated 01.12.1996;
(2) Shri Komal Singh, the then Controller, Food and Drug Administration, Govt. of M.P., if he is available. In case, he is not available, then other officer of the Controller, Food and Drug Administration, Govt. of M.P. alongwith record of the correspondence dated 01.12.1996 as court witnesses.
The petition is disposed of with aforesaid directions. Certified copy today.
(G.S.Solanki) Judge gn