Disposed¶33

Sh. Sanjeev Kumar Bhatia and 7 Ors. v. The Union of India

Gauhati HC9 Mar 2025I.A.(Crl.)/8/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Gauhati High Court; Crl.Pet./3/2025; Michael Zothankhuma; 10.03.2025; Drugs Inspector; CDSCO Sub Zone Guwahati; Union of India; MS Algen Healthcare Limited; Directors; Central Medical Store Aizawl; samples drawn 10.11.2021; report 28.04.2022 not of standard quality; JMFC Aizawl Criminal Complaint No. 119/2020; cognizance; Section 27 (e) Drugs & Cosmetics Act 1940; Rule 45 Drugs & Cosmetics Rules 1945; six weeks test report; Section 528 BNSS; I.A.(Crl.) No. 8 of 2025; cause title correction; listed 12.03.2025; adjourned; no final order.

What did the court decide?

Procedural/interim only: cause title allowed to be corrected per Order dated 10.03.2025 in I.A.(Crl.) No. 8 of 2025, and the matter listed on 12.03.2025 at the learned CGC's prayer; the petition itself remains undecided. ¶33

Sh. Sanjeev Kumar Bhatia and 7 Ors. Vs The Union of India — Gauhati HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶33

Issue for consideration

Whether the Order dated 02.06.2023 of the JMFC, Aizawl in Criminal Complaint No. 119/2020, by which cognizance of an offence under Section 27 (e) of the Drugs & Cosmetics Act, 1940 was taken against the petitioners, should be set aside — challenged on the ground that the test report should have been made within six (6) weeks in terms of Rule 45 of the Drugs & Cosmetics Rules, 1945 (as amended in 2017). +1 more

¶27

Ratio / Principle

In view of the Order dated 10.03.2025 passed in I.A.(Crl.) No. 8 of 2025, the court allowed the cause title to be corrected so that the respondent is described as the Union of India represented by the Drugs Inspector, Office of the Assistant Drugs Controller (India), CDSCO Sub Zone Guwahati.

¶25

Key takeaways

On the prayer of the learned CGC, the matter was listed for hearing on Wednesday, i.e. 12.03.2025; no decision was taken on the prayer to set aside the cognizance order.ratio¶33

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Gauhati High Court, Crl.Pet./3/2025 (Hon'ble Mr. Justice Michael Zothankhuma, order dated 10.03.2025): Eight petitioners, stated to be Directors of MS Algen Healthcare Limited, seek setting aside of the Order dated 02.06.2023 of the JMFC, Aizawl in Criminal Complaint No. 119/2020 taking cognizance of an offence under Section 27 (e) of the Drugs & Cosmetics Act, 1940. Their grounds are that the report on samples drawn on 10.11.2021 from the Central Medical Store, Aizawl, issued on 28.04.2022 finding the medicines not of standard quality, should have been made within six (6) weeks in terms of Rule 45 of the Drugs & Cosmetics Rules, 1945 (as amended in 2017), and that nothing in the respondent's complaint shows how the Directors were involved in the manufacture of the sampled drugs. Learned CGC S. K. Medhi submitted he had not received a copy of the petition filed under Section 528 of the BNSS. Acting on its earlier Order dated 10.03.2025 in I.A.(Crl.) No. 8 of 2025, the court allowed the cause title to be corrected to describe the respondent as the Union of India represented by the Drugs Inspector, CDSCO Sub Zone Guwahati, and listed the matter on 12.03.2025. No merits determination was made.

¶1

Page No.# 1/6

¶2

GAHC030001282025

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : Crl.Pet./3/2025

¶5

Sh. Sanjeev Kumar Bhatia and 7 Ors. S/o Sh. K.L. Bhatia R/o House No. 562 Section-2 Panchkula PO Panchkula Section 8 District Panchkula Haryana - 134 109

¶6

2: Sh. Virender Miglani S/o Vir Bhan Miglani R/o C-87 Sangam Apartment Sector - 9 Rohini Rohini Sector-7 North West Delhi Delhi - 110085

¶7

3: Smt. Sharda Rani Bhatia D/o Bhagwan Dass Bhatia R/o BC-7 Miyanwali Nagar Paschim Vihar New Delhi Delhi - 110087

¶8

4: Sh. Manish Kumar S/o Ishwar Chand R/oo H-76 Third Floor Shivaji Park Punjabi Bagh West Delhi

¶9

Page No.# 2/6

¶10

Delhi - 110026 5: Sh. Pramod Sethi S/o Tirath Ram Sethi R/o C-38 Shivaji Park Punjabi Bagh West Delhi Delhi - 110026 6: Sh. Krishan LalBhatia S/o Ram Chand Bhatia R/o BC-7 AB Mianwali Nagar Paschim Vihar New Delhi Delhi - 110087 7: Sh. Mohan Singh S/o Khajan Singh R/o 496 Krishna Colony Ward N.13 Naraingarh (219) Ambala Haryana - 134203 8: Sh. Radhe Shyam S/o Nolaram R/o Tehsil Nawa Lamba Nagaur Rajasthan - 341519 VERSUS Sh. Abu Janif Imran Choudhury Drugs Inspector O/o the Assistant Drugs Controller (India) Central Drugs Standard Control Organization (CDSCO) Sub Zone Guwahati RDTL Campus Six Mile Panjabari Road Guwahati - 781 022

¶11

Page No.# 3/6

¶12

Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Joseph Lalchhanhima Renthlei

¶13

Advocate for the Respondent :

¶14

Linked Case : Crl.Pet./3/2025

¶15

Sh. Sanjeev Kumar Bhatia and 7 Ors. S/o Sh. K.L. Bhatia R/o House No. 562 Section-2 Panchkula PO Panchkula Section 8 District Panchkula Haryana - 134 109 2: Sh. Virender Miglani S/o Vir Bhan Miglani R/o C-87 Sangam Apartment Sector - 9 Rohini Rohini Sector-7 North West Delhi Delhi - 110085 3: Smt. Sharda Rani Bhatia D/o Bhagwan Dass Bhatia R/o BC-7 Miyanwali Nagar Paschim Vihar New Delhi Delhi - 110087 4: Sh. Manish Kumar S/o Ishwar Chand R/oo H-76 Third Floor Shivaji Park Punjabi Bagh West Delhi Delhi - 110026

¶16

5: Sh. Pramod Sethi

¶17

Page No.# 4/6

¶18

S/o Tirath Ram Sethi R/o C-38 Shivaji Park Punjabi Bagh West Delhi Delhi - 110026 6: Sh. Krishan LalBhatia S/o Ram Chand Bhatia R/o BC-7 AB Mianwali Nagar Paschim Vihar New Delhi Delhi - 110087 7: Sh. Mohan Singh S/o Khajan Singh R/o 496 Krishna Colony Ward N.13 Naraingarh (219) Ambala Haryana - 134203 8: Sh. Radhe Shyam S/o Nolaram R/o Tehsil Nawa Lamba Nagaur Rajasthan - 341519 VERSUS Sh. Abu Janif Imran Choudhury Drugs Inspector O/o the Assistant Drugs Controller (India) Central Drugs Standard Control Organization (CDSCO) Sub Zone Guwahati RDTL Campus Six Mile Panjabari Road Guwahati - 781 022

¶19

Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Joseph Lalchhanhima Renthlei Advocate for the Respondent :

Page No.# 5/6

ORDER

B E F O R E

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA

¶24

10.03.2025

¶25

In view of the Order dated 10.03.2025 passed in I.A.(Crl.) No. 8 of 2025, the cause title is allowed to be corrected as follows:-

¶26

“The Union of India represented by Shri. Abu Hanif Imram Choudhury, Drugs Inspector, Office of the Assistant Drugs Controller (India), Central Drugs Standard Control Organization (C.D.S.C.O) Sub Zone Guwahati, RDTL Campus, Six Mile, Panjabari Road, Guwahati-781022.”

¶27

Mr. Joseph L Renthlei, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the Order dated 02.06.2023 passed by the Court of the JMFC, Aizawl in Criminal Complaint No. 119/2020, by which cognizance of an offence under Section 27 (e) of the Drugs & Cosmetics Act, 1940 has been taken against the petitioners, should be set aside.

¶28

The case of the petitioners is that some drugs were drawn from the Central Medical Store, Aizawl allegedly manufactured by MS Algen Healthcare Limited. The petitioners are Directors of MS Algen Healthcare Limited. The medicine samples were drawn on 10.11.2021 and sent for testing. A report was issued on 28.04.2022 showing that the medicines were not of standard quality.

¶29

The petitioners’ challenge to the impugned order is on the ground that the report on the samples sent, should have been made within six (6) weeks, in terms of Rule 45 of the Drugs & Cosmetics Rules, 1945 as amended in 2017. He further submits that there is nothing to show in the complaint made by the

¶30

Page No.# 6/6

¶31

respondent, as to how the Directors of the Company were involved in the manufacture of the sampled drugs.

¶32

Mr. S. K. Medhi, learned CGC submits that he has not received a copy of the petition which has been filed under Section 528 of the BNSS.

¶33

On the prayer of the learned CGC, list the matter on Wednesday i.e. 12.03.2025 .

¶34

JUDGE

¶35

Comparing Assistant

Sh. Sanjeev Kumar Bhatia and 7 Ors. v. The Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sh. Sanjeev Kumar Bhatia and 7 Ors. v. The Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S. Cinnamara Roller Flour Mills Vs the Assam Power Distribution Co. Ltd. and 3 Ors.

Smti Geetilekha Devi Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Bidya Chakravorty and 13 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 10 Ors.

Smt. Teresa Lalnithangi and 2 Ors. Vs The State of Mizoram r/b Chief Secretary to the Govt. of Mizoram and 3 Ors.

Sh. Zosiamliana Vs Sh. Jacob Lalpekhlua

Sh. Thangdoliana Vs The State of Mizoram and 4 Ors.