Dismissed

Amir Karimsab Shaikh v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Bombay HC15 Jun 2023ABA/527/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment is an order in an anticipatory bail application filed by a medical representative. The High Court rejected the request for extended interim protection, dismissing the application due to prima facie evidence of involvement in illegal sale of Schedule H drugs and the necessity of custodial investigation.

What did the court decide?

Rejected the request to extend interim protection; dismissed the anticipatory bail application.

Amir Karimsab Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another — Corruption | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

932-ABA-527-2023.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.527 OF 2023

¶4

AMIR KARIMSAB SHAIKH

¶5

VERSUS

¶6

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

¶7

...

¶8

Advocate for Applicant : Mr. S. S. Kazi
APP for Respondents: Mr. G. O. Watamwar

¶9

...

¶10

CORAM:R.M. JOSHI, J
DATE:JUNE 15, 2023

¶11

PER COURT :

¶12

1.Applicant apprehends arrest in connection with

¶13

crime bearing F.I.R. No. 31/2023 registered with
Shivajinagar Police Station, Latur for the offences
punishable under Sections 376, 336, 420, 471 read with
Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

2.On 04th January, 2023 report came to be given

¶15

to the police alleging that on large scale Napromine
injection 10 ml (Mephentermin Suphate I.P. 30 mg)
manufactured by Miraculus Pharma Pvt. Ltd is circulated
in the market. Since secret information was received to
that effect, raid was conducted on Surya Medical and
Distributors, Latur on 09.12.2022. During the said
raid, it was found that the said injection was

¶16

Page 1 of 5

¶17

932-ABA-527-2023.odt

¶18

purchased by M/s Pharmaco and it was sold to various
medical stores. It is alleged that by showing bogus
address, license number, etc of purchasers bills were
found to have been prepared. There was huge amount of
breakage shown and such injections were in fact sold
through present applicant, on receiving cash. It is
revealed that sale was effected through applicant who
is medical representative of Triken Co. It is further
stated in the report that the said medicine is schedule
H drug and the prescription of the doctor is mandatory
for purchase of the same. It was further found in
enquiry that the medical store to which the said sale
is said to have been made is not found functioning and
by preparing false bills sale is effected. It is also
stated therein that said medicine is also abused for
achieving better physical performance and that there
are side effects of the said medicine which in some
cases may lead to causing of death. On these
allegations, report came to be lodged.

¶19

3.Learned Counsel for the Applicant states that
the Applicant is medical representative of Troika
Pharmaceutical Company and that except for the alleged

¶20

Page 2 of 5

¶21

932-ABA-527-2023.odt

¶22

statement of the co-accused there is no evidence to
show his involvement in the crime. It is further stated
that it is not the job of the medical representative to
sell or purchase the medicine, and he is only supposed

¶23

to canvass the product to doctors for its
recommendation/prescription.

¶24

4.Learned APP opposed the said submissions by
contending that there is a statement of Uttamrao
Suryawanshi showing that it was the present Applicant
who had by showing the license, on his mobile phone,
has taken delivery of the medicine for its sale to Aman
Medico, Y.S. Hospital, Nanded. He has specifically
stated that present Applicant has paid a sum of Rs.
9,051/- in cash to him. Applicant is a medical
representative working for one pharma co, hence it
cannot even be said that innocently he purchased the
said schedule drug.

¶25

5.It is sought to be argued that the statement
of co-accused cannot become admissible evidence against
present Applicant. It is pertinent to note that the
statement has not been made to any police officer but

¶26

Page 3 of 5

¶27

932-ABA-527-2023.odt

¶28

it was recorded by drug inspector on 20.12.2022 i.e.,
prior to filing of the first information report. Thus,
prima facie there is no bar to admit such statement as
evidence. During the course of inquiry it was also
found that the Aman Medico for whom delivery was taken
is not in existence and the owner of the said shop,
which existed earlier, has denied purchase of the said
medicine.

¶29

6.Having considered the fact that medicine in
question is schedule H drug and that its abuse is also
apprehended. It is alleged that there is abuse of this
drug by its use without prescription. First information
report states that without knowing the contents and its
side effects, this injection is sold to customers and
gymnasiums. There are adverse effect of this drug,
which is illegally used to achieve better performance
ignoring the drastic effects on health, which may lead
to death. Having regard to the material evidence on
record, custodial interrogation of the Applicant would
be necessary for effective investigation of the crime,
as it just and necessary to ascertain other purchases
done if any of this drug and further sale thereof by

¶30

Page 4 of 5

¶31

932-ABA-527-2023.odt

¶32

Applicant. Grant of protection from arrest may create
impediment in the effective interrogation of crime,
which is absolutely essential for the society at large.
Hence, application stands dismissed.

¶33

7.Learned Counsel for the Applicant states that
interim protection granted to Applicant be extended for
further period of four weeks.

¶34

8.Perusal of the order dated 18th April, 2023
shows that on prima facie consideration of the first
information report the protection was granted. At that
stage except for FIR, no other material was on record.
Now, statement recorded by the drug inspector, evidence
about purchase in name of non existing medical store on
bogus bills is apparently seen. Once this Court records
finding there is prima facie involvement of the
Applicant in serious crime which requires urgent
effective investigation, it is not fit case to extend
interim relief. Hence, request stands rejected.

¶35

Malani

¶36

Page 5 of 5

Amir Karimsab Shaikh v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amir Karimsab Shaikh v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sayyad Altaf Sayyad Akbar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Salimkhan Jabbarkhan Pathan and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ashok Karbhari Devkate Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Sushilkumar Sudhakar Makasare Vs the Superintendent of Police, Ahmednagar and Another

Pallavi W/O. Sushilkumar Makasare Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Akshay S/O. Yogesh @ Yahuba Autade Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another