Crl. Misc. No.M-17978 of 2008 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Misc. No.M-17978 of 2008 Date of Decision: 27.01.2011 Rajesh Gupta ....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM : Hon'ble Ms. Justice Nirmaljit Kaur Present:- Mr. Naresh Batra, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. K.S. Pannu, D.A.G., Punjab for the respondent-State. ***** 1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ? ** NIRMALJIT KAUR, J. This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C for quashing of FIR No.33 dated 13.02.2005 registered under Sections 21/61/85 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (here-in-after referred to as “the Act”) at Police Station City Hoshiarpur and the consequential proceedings arising out of the same. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is a registered licence holder for selling the medicines in bulk. The licence was issued in the name of Aggarwal Medical Agency, Shri Guru Arjun Dev Complex, Bani Khawaju (Hoshiarpur). The authorized person of this firm is Rajesh Gupta son of Sh. Roshan Lal Gupta. This licence was issued and valid w.e.f 14.05.2004 to 13.05.2008. The present FIR was lodged on 13.02.2005 under Sections 21/61/85 of the Act against the petitioner on the allegation that the following Crl. Misc. No.M-17978 of 2008 2 medicines were recovered from him :- (i) AVL-10 ml = 96 small bottles (ii) Parvonspas-Cap 3100 (iii) Lomotil tab – 1750 (iv) G-Norphine – 410 The medicines allegedly recovered from the petitioner were purchased from the wholesale pharmaceutical Distributor, namely, Mahavir Medical Agencies, Hoshiarpur and Kewal Pharmaceutical Distribution, SCR 19, Phase 9, Mohali. Reply on behalf of respondent No.1 has been filed. It is not disputed that the petitioner was holding a valid licence issued by a competent authority. The petitioner, thus, can possess the alleged recovered medicine as per 66 Rules of the Act and S.O. 826 (E.14.11.1985). However, the only objection raised and as stated in para 5 of the reply is that the narcotics drugs were recovered from the petitioner at his house and he was not having the valid licence to store the narcotic drugs at his house, thereby, the petitioner has committed the offence under the provisions of the NDPS Act. It is not disputed that otherwise, the petitioner had a valid licence to keep the said drugs for which the Drugs and Cosmetic Act, 1940 and rules thereunder are sufficient to deal with any of the offences to distribute, sale, purchase or stock or exhibitor offer for sale or manufacture etc. Some relevant portion of Section 18(c) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 reads as under:- 18. Prohibition of manufacture and sale of certain drugs and cosmetics From such date as may be fixed by the State Government by notification in the official gazette in this behalf, no person shall himself or by any other person on his behalf - Crl. Misc. No.M-17978 of 2008 3 a) xx xx xx b) xx xx xx c) manufacture for sale or for distribution, or sell, or stock or exhibitor offer for sale or distribute any drug or cosmetics except under and in accordance with the conditions of a licence issued for such purpose under this chapter.” The licence is issued subject to the conditions as specified in Rule 65 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945. Sub conditions (1), (2) and (3)(1) of Rule 65 of the Drugs and Cosmetic Rules, 1945 read as under :- “(1) Any drug shall, if compounded or made on the licensee's premises, be compounded or made by or under the direct and personal supervision of a registered Pharmacist. (2) The supply, otherwise than by way of wholesale dealing of any drug supplied on the prescription of a Registered Medical Practitioner shall be effected only by or under the personal supervision of a registered pharmacist. (3)(1) The supply of any drug other than those specified in Schedule X on a prescription of a registered medical practitioner shall be recorded at the time of supply in a prescription register specially maintained for the purpose and the serial number of entry in this regard shall be entered on the prescription. The following particulars shall be entered in the register - a) serial number of the entry, b) the date of supply, c) the name and address of the prescriber, d) the name and address of the patient, or the name and address of the owner of the animal if the drug supplied is for veterinary use.” Rule 66 provides for cancellation and suspension of licenses in case of violation of any of the terms and conditions which reads Crl. Misc. No.M-17978 of 2008 4 as under :- 66. Cancellation and suspension of licences: 1) The licensing authority may, after giving the licensee an opportunity to show cause why such an order should not be passed by an order in writing stating the reasons therefor, cancel a licence issued under this part or suspend it for such period as he thinks fit, either wholly or in respect of some of the substances to which it relates, if in his opinion, the licensee has failed to comply with any of the conditions of the licence or with any provisions of the Act or Rules thereunder :- It is admitted by the State that the petitioner had a valid licence for the sale of the drugs as recovered from him. Thus, the only objection that they were recovered from the house shall not invite the provisions of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act. Thus the offence, if at all. as discussed above, falls under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act which is sufficient to deal with the same. Thus, in view of the above discussion, the present petition is allowed and FIR No.33 dated 13.02.2005 registered under Sections 21/61/85 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act at Police Station City Hoshiarpur and all consequential proceedings arising out of the same are, hereby, quashed. (NIRMALJIT KAUR) 27.01.2011 JUDGE gurpreet