IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION NO. 352 OF 2009 IN STAMP NUMBER MAIN NO. 3461 OF 2009 STATE THROUGH DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF FOOD AND DRUGS ADMINISTRATION ... Applicant Versus M/S. NORRIS MEDICINES LIMITED AND 2 ORS. ... Respondent Mr. C.A. Ferreira, Public Prosecutor for the State. Coram:- R. M. SAVANT, J. Date:- 8th March, 2010 P.C. The State has filed the above application seeking the leave to appeal against Judgment and Order dated 20/7/2009 passed by the Learned JMFC, Ponda. The respondent/accused was prosecuted under the provisions of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 and Rules made thereunder. The allegation against the respondent/accused was that the drug sample of the drug " Uriclox dry syrup" was not of standard quality and the contents of one ingredient "Cloxacillin" in the sample was less than the label amount of 54.86%. The complaint was therefore filed for contravention of section 18(a)(i) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act. The said according to the prosecution constituted an offence under section 27(d) of the said Act. 2. It has come in the evidence of the prosecution through prosecution witness PW1 Salim Velgi that he was not aware whether the drug conformed to the prescribed standards at the time of manufacturing. The Trial Court was therefore of the view that the prosecution could not nail the accused for not conforming to the prescribed standards at the time of manufacture and was of the view that the case would have to be proceeded on the basis that the prescribed standards were followed at the time of manufacture. It has also come in the evidence of the prosecution that when there is no specific storage instructions the retailer or whole seller or the consumer would store the drug under room temperature. It has further come in evidence that the whole seller had stored the consignment in question in a premises which was on the top floor of the building in question and was therefore exposed to the sunlight. The Trial Court therefore on the basis of the aforesaid evidence was of the view that since the drug was not stored in a cool dry place as mandated under the drug laws and considering that "Cloxacillin" is a very unstable drug, it may have lost its potency due to improper storage by M/s Enkay Agencies who was whole seller who had taken supply from the accused/manufacturer. The Trial Court therefore, recorded findings that it is probable that the drug might have got altered in these conditions which were beyond the control of the accused. The Trial Court was therefore of the view that the defence of the accused was probable that the drug might have got altered in those circumstances. 3. The Trial Court has also recorded a finding that in view of non compliance of section 23(iii) and (iv) of the said Act, under which provision the prosecution was to give a sample of the drug to the accused, having not been complied with there was breach of said provision resulting in violation of the principles of natural justice and the accused was therefore entitled to the benefit of doubt. 4. On the aforesaid two counts the accused has been acquitted. In my view the aforesaid two grounds go to the route of the matter as regards the prosecution of the accused. The appeal in my view therefore does not raise any questions of fact or law. The above application for leave to appeal is accordingly rejected. 5. In view of the rejection of the application for leave to appeal Stamp Number Main no. 3461 of 2009 does not survive and is accordingly disposed of. R. M. SAVANT, J. vn