AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard the parties.
The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Dhanwar P.S. Case No. 397 of 2017 corresponding to G. R. No. 3722 of 2017.
It has been alleged that a raid was conducted in the clinic of the petitioner. The medicines were stored without any valid licence. The medicine shop
was sealed by the authorities.
It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that Section 276 of IPC is not made out so far as the present case is concerned.
Learned counsel further submits that Section 27 (b) and 27 (d) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act comes under Chapter IV of the Act and in view of
Section 32 of the Act, a police officer cannot prosecute offenders in relation to such offences committed under the Act. It has thus been submitted
that since authorization itself appears to be invalid in view of the judgment rendered in the case of ""Union of India Vs. Ashok Kumar Sharma
reported in 2020 SCC Online SC 683, the petitioner deserves the privilege of anticipatory bail.
Mr. Vishwanath Roy, learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer and has stated while referring to the aforesaid judgment that wherever FIRs have been
instituted, the same are to be made over by the police officer to the concerned Drug Inspector. It has further been submitted that some of the
offences are cognizable in nature and since the FIR clearly points to an offence committed by the petitioner, this application is liable to be rejected.
It appears from the allegations levelled that prima-facie no case under Section 276 I.P.C. is made out. So far as the offence under the Drugs and
Cosmetics Act, 1940 are concerned, the same comes under Chapter IV of the said Act and in view of the judgment rendered in the case of ""Union of
India Vs. Ashok Kumar Sharma"" (supra), no police officer can prosecute offenders in regard to such offence in terms of Section 32 of the Act.
On consideration of the nature of allegations levelled against the petitioner and the directions/conclusions rendered in the case of ""Union of India Vs.
Ashok Kumar Sharma"" (supra), I am inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Accordingly, the petitioner above named is directed to surrender in the court below within four weeks and pray for bail, and in that event, he shall be
released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Judicial
Magistrate, Giridih in connection with Dhanwar P.S. Case No. 397 of 2017 corresponding to G. R. No. 3722 of 2017., subject to the conditions as laid
down under Section 438 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
This application stands allowed.