Allahabad High Court
M/S Zee Laboratories And Another vs Union Of India And Another on 1 October, 2019
Author: Rajiv Joshi
Bench: Rajiv Joshi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 72 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 35148 of 2019 Applicant :- M/S Zee Laboratories And Another Opposite Party :- Union Of India And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vivek Kumar Maheshwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- A.S.G.I.,Jitendra Prasad Mishra Hon'ble Rajiv Joshi,J.
1. Heard Sri Vivek Kumar Maheshwari learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Jitendra Prasad Mishra, learned Central Government Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party no.2.
2. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the summoning order dated 18.02.2017 as well as the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 8973 of 2017, under Section- 18 (a) (i) read with Section 16 punishable under Section 27 (d) of Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 and Rules, 1945, pending in the court of Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar.
3. The contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that no offence against the applicants is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purpose of causing harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention. At this stage, the argument raised by learned counsel for the applicants involves factual disputes and appraisal of evidence.
4. From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicants at this stage. All the submissions made at the bar, relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283.
5. The prayer for quashing the entire proceeding of the aforesaid case is refused.
6. However, in view of the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that in case the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 30 days from today and apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgement passed by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.
7. For a period of 30 days, no coercive measure shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case.
8. With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 1.10.2019 Noman