High Court
Case Details
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:120296 Court No. - 75 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 19966 of 2025 Applicant :- Marc Life Sciences Sikkim And 5 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shriprakash Shrivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J.
Legal Reasoning
9. Learned AGA on the other hand submits that from the allegations contained in the complaint, prima facie offences are made out an the case is triable. However, he could not dispute the fact that the summoning order does not recite the case of the complainant and the same is non speaking, unreasoned. He thus submits that the summoning order be set aside and the matter is remitted back to the court below to pass a fresh order. 10. I have heard the submissions so made across the bar and perused the record carefully. 11. The summoning order dated 01.04.2024 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amroha reads as under: "01.04.2024 आज यह पपप हहआ। पररवपद- पत पररवपद- पत अवललककत । अवललकन सस कवकदत हलतप हह कक यह पररवपद- ककशलर रसतलगग, कनकतन ककशलर रसतलगग, पत अकभययकगण मपकर लपइफ सपइइससज, पसम अकमत ककशलर कवकपन ककशलर रसतलगग, रसतलगग, कवभपस आनइद सयशगल कय मपर कस कवरद औषधध कनरगकक दपरप अनतगरत धपरप 18 (ए) 1 सपकठत धपरप 27 (डग) औषधध एवइ पसपधन अधधकनयम पसकषत ककयप गयप हह। अतत पररवपद कस रप मम दजर रधजसटर हल। चच इकक पररवपदग ललक ससवक हह। अतत बयपन अनतगरत धपरप 200 दइ०प०सइ० कक आवशयकतप नहह हह। पररवपद कस अवललकन सस कवकदत हह कक अकभययकगण कल धपरप 18 (ए) 1 सपकठत धपरप 27 (डग) औषधध एवइ पसपधन अधधकनयम कस अपरपध कस धलए तलब ककयस जपनस कप आधपर पयपरप हह। अतत धपरप 202 दइ०प०सइ० कस बयपनन कक भग आवशयकतप नहह हह। अतत अकभययकगण कल धपरप 18 (ए) 1 पसपधन अधधकनयम कस अपरपध मम अकभययकगण कस 20.04.2024 कल पसश हल।" कवरद समन जपरग हन। पतपवलग वपसतस हपधजरग सपकठत धपरप 27 (डग) औषधध एवइ कवचपरण हसतय तलब ककयप जपतप हह। कदनपइक 12. A perusal of the summoning order would reveal that the same is non speaking, unreasoned and it does not recite the case of the complainant less to say about prima-facie application of the penal provisions. In the case of J.M Lab (Supra) the Hon'ble Apex Court observed as under: "9. In the present case also, no reasons even for the namesake have been assigned by the learned Magistrate. The summoning order is totally a non- speaking one. We therefore find that in light of the view taken by us in criminal appeal arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 2345 of 2024 titled "INOX Air Products Limited Now Known as INOX Air Products Private Limited and Another v. The State of Andhra Pradesh", and the legal position as has been laid down by this Court in a catena of judgments including in the cases of Pepsi Foods Ltd. and another Vs. Special Judicial Magistrate and others, Sunil Bharti Mittal Vs. Central Central Bureau of Investigation, Mehmood U Rehman Vs. Khazir Mohammad Tunda and others and Krishna Lal Chawla and others Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and another, the present appeal deserves to be allowed." 13. Since the aforesaid aspect is completely lacking, thus the summoning order cannot be sustained. Accordingly, the application is being decided in the following terms: a. The order dated 01.04.2024 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amroha in Sessions Case 246 of 2024 pending in the court of Additional District and Sessions Judge, Amroha arising out of complaint case no. 2748 of 2024 U/s 32 of Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 for offences U/s 18(a) (i) read with section 27(d) of the said Act is set aside. b The matter stands remitted back to the court below to pass a fresh order . c. For facilitation in speedy disposal, the parties shall place this order before the court below by 31.07.2025. 14. The instructions marked as Appendix- A. Order Date :- 21.7.2025 C. MANI Digitally signed by :- CHANDRAMANI VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Arguments
1. Heard Sri Sriprakash Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri S.K. Singh, learned AGA for the State. 2. This Court on 07.07.2025 requiring learned AGA to obtain instructions. 3. Today Sri S.K. Singh, learned AGA has produced before this Court the instructions under the Signatures of the opposite party no.1 & 2 Drug Inspector. He submits that they are not propose to file any affidavit and the application be decided on the basis of documents available on record. 4. This is an application U/s 528 BNSS filed for quashing the summoning order dated 01.04.2024 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amroha in Sessions Case 246 of 2024 pending in the court of Additional District and Sessions Judge, Amroha arising out of complaint case no. 2748 of 2024 U/s 32 of Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 for offences U/s 18(a) (i) read with section 27(d) of the said Act. 5. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that a complaint stood preferred by the opposite party no.2 Drug Inspector Amroha with an allegations that on 30.04.2022 Drug Inspector conducted an inspection of the medicine shop known as M/s Vishwa Karma Medical Store situated at Delhi Road, Zoya, Police Station Didauli, District Amroha wherein the samples were drawn and taken for examination analyst in form-17. The samples were sent to Government Analyst for examination in form-18 on 30.04.2022 and, further government analyst vide its report dated 12.07.2022 prepared in form-13 declaring the drug "Co-Trimoxazole Tablets I.P. (Marcoprim) (for vet use), batch no. SMT 374, M/D-12/2021, E./D-11/2024" was sub-standard. Thereafter the opposite party no.2 along with the report of the government analyst sent a notice to the applicant on 06.08.2022 seeking information regarding the source from the purchase of sub-standard medicine. 6. On 15.12.2022, the medical store informed the drug inspector that the medicines was purchased from M/s Deep Pharma Traders Moradabad, U.P. thereafter a notice was sent to M/s Deep Pharma Traders who informed that the drug in question was procured from Marc India Ltd. and the information was issued to M/s Marc India Ltd. who did not respond. Thus, reminders were send, thereafter the M/s Marc India Ltd apprise the drug inspector that it was purchased from M/s Marc Sciences, Sikkim pursuant to wherein the complaint also stood preferred and by order dated 01.04.2024 the applicants came to be summoned U/s 18(a) (i) read with section 27(d) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, by the court below. 7. Questioning the summoning order, the applicants have filed the present application. 8. Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that though on merits the allegations contained in the complaint do not constitute any penal provisions under which the applicants is being sought to be summoned but the sole and the fundamental question which arises that the summoning order has been passed in a cryptic manner without recording any reasons while satisfying that the prima-facie offences are made out. He submits that the summoning order is unreasoned, non speaking. Reliance has been placed upon the case of in SLP (Criminal) No.5067 of 2024, M/S J.M. Laboratories Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh decided on 30.1.2025. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the summoning order be set aside and the matter remitted back to the court below to pass a fresh order.