IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 2ND JULY 2009 / 11TH ASHADHA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 842 of 2009() ------------------------ CC.2782/2001 of ADDL.CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONER(S): A6 TO A9: --------------------------------------- 1. M/S. STANDARD PHARMACEUTICALS AGENCIES, 39/3242-A, VIJAYARAMA MENON ROAD, RAVIPURAM, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTED BY THE PARTNER, MR. MATHEW ABRAHAM. 2. MATHEW ABRAHAM, AGED 72, 22, SILVER BEACH, OFF. CADELL ROAD, OPP.CATERING COLLEGE, DADAR WEST, MUMBAI - 400 028. 3. SANTHOSH MATHEW ABRAHAM, AGED 43, S/O. MATHEW ABRAHAM, 22, SILVER BEACH, OFF. CADELL ROAD, OPP. CATERING COLLEGE, DADAR WEST,MUMBAI - 400 028. 4. KOSHY MATHEW, AGED 55, MANAGER, M/S. STANDARD PHARAMACEUTICALS AGENCIES, 39/3242-A, VIJAYARAMA MENON ROAD, RAVIPURAM, ERNAKULAM. BY ADVS. MR.C.P.UDAYABHANU, MR.R.HARIKRISHNAN (VADAKEYIL). RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT: --------------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DRUGS INSPECTOR, OFFICE OF THE ASST. DRUGS CONTROLLER, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. GIKKU JACOB THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss M.Sasidharan Nambiar, J. -------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.842 of 2009 -------------------------- ORDER Petitioners are accused 6 to 9 in C.C.No. 2782/2001 on the file of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court, Ernakulam. Cognizance for the offences under Sections 18(a)(i) read with Section 17(b) and Rule 96(1)(vii) and Section 27(d) of Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 was taken by the Magistrate on Annexure-I complaint. First accused is a Private Limited Company. Accused 2 to 5 are the Directors of the Company. Sixth accused is a Partnership Firm engaged in distribution of drugs. Accused 7 and 8 are its partners and 9th accused is the Manager of the Firm. Accused 1 to 5 filed O.P. No.10793/2002 before this Court for a declaration that there is no misbranding and to quash Exhibit P8 complaint and also to prohibit filing of complaints on the allegation that there is misbranding. Under Annexure-II judgment dated CRMC 842/09 2 5.12.2003 original petition was allowed and Exhibit P8 complaint therein, which is Annexure-I herein, was quashed. Respondents were directed not to lodge criminal prosecution against the Company or the licencee. This petition is filed by remaining accused 6 to 9 as they apprehend that learned Magistrate will not treat quashing of Annexure-I complaint as quashing in toto but only as against accused 1 to 5, who are the petitioners in the original petition. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 3. As is clear from Annexure-II judgment in O.P.No.10793/2002, this Court had already quashed Exhibit P8 complaint therein, which is Annexure-I herein. It was not quashed as against the writ petitioners alone but as a whole. Moreover, when complaint as against accused 1 to 5 was quashed, it will not lie as against accused 6 to 9, as sixth accused firm is only a dealer and accused 7 and 8 CRMC 842/09 3 are its partners and 9th accused its Manager. Therefore, it is clear that by quashing of Annexure-I complaint by Annexure-II judgment, the entire prosecution on the cognizance taken on Annexure-I complaint was quashed by this Court. In view of quashing of the complaint under Annexure-II judgment, there is no necessity to quash the complaint once again. Petition is disposed. 2nd July, 2009 (M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge) tkv