Shiv Lal Yadav vs State of Haryana

G.S. Chahal, J.

Shiv Lal Yadav by way of this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeks quashing of complaint dated 14th of June, 1988 Annexure P1 filed for offence under Sections 27 and 28 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940. The prosecution was launched on the grounds that the petitioner without holding a valid licence exhibited for sale and stocked drugs. The complaint was filed in June, 1988.

The prosecution had been challenged on the basis that there was no Magistrate authorised to try the case on the date of complaint was filed.

Section 36A of the Act provides as follows :

"36A. Certain offences to be tried summarily Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) all offences under this Act, punishable with imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years, other than an offence under clause (b) of subsection (1) of Section 33I, shall be tried in a summary way by a Judicial Magistrate of the first class specially empowered in this behalf by the State Government or by a Metropolitan Magistrate and the provisions of Sections 262 to 265 (both inclusive) of the said Code shall, as far as may be, apply to such trial."

Admittedly, the first notification under this section was issued by the Haryana Government on 20th September, 1991. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gurgaon, had no jurisdiction to entertain and take cognizance of the complaint on the date it was filed. In this situation, the proceedings were void ab initio and on this short ground, the complaint is liable to be quashed. I hereby allow the petition and quash the complaint and all consequential proceedings. The petition stands disposed of.