Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 7 of 7 (0.18 seconds)Section 23 in The Drugs And Cosmetics Act, 1940 [Entire Act]
Section 27 in The Drugs And Cosmetics Act, 1940 [Entire Act]
Section 482 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 18A in The Drugs And Cosmetics Act, 1940 [Entire Act]
The Companies Act, 1956
Drugs Inspector, Central Drugs ... vs Modern Drugs And Anr. on 3 November, 1981
18. Mr. Mukherjee referring to the decision in the case of Drugs Inspector, Central Drugs Standard Control Organisation (South) Zone, Madras-6 v. Modern Drugs and Anr. reported in 1982 Cr.LJ 2285, submitted that in absence of non-compliance of the provision under Section 25 of the Act, the proceeding cannot be allowed to continue. In the said case it was held that the accused having not been supplied copy of the analyst report, the conviction and sentence could not be sustained. Thus, it related to appreciation of materials at the post-conviction stage. In the present case, a close analysis of the allegations as made in the petition of complaint indicates alleged commission of the offence and the allegations made in such petition do not suffer from any such inherent absurdity so as to raise controversy in regard to its maintainability. There is no such inconsistency or antagonistic contradiction which strikes at the root of the case and makes further proceeding an undesirable exercise in futility. In view of the claim, as made in the application, that the sample collected were divided into four portions and one of the same was duly given to the accused persons and the further claim that copy of the report of Government Analyst was duly supplied, there does not seem to be much merit in the grievances. The petition of complaint which was filed before the learned Court and the copy of which was annexed to the present application and the relevant materials do not lend any support to the claim that continuation of the proceeding will be an abuse of the process of Court. The case at this stage does not seem to be suffering from any such inherent illegality which can justify interference in the way of quashing of the proceeding under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code.
1