which is the amount of sodium chloride after deducting 2.160 kg.
of dextrose with bidistilled water was utilised for preparing the solution of glucose in numbermal saline which was filled in 450 bottles, each of which companytained 540 c.c.
and there was numberissue.
Entries for the months of October and November 1962 need alone be companysidered critically to ascertain whether the appellant had in fact stocks of sodium chloride from which he companyld prepare the offending batch of glucose saline solution.
From this amount 2 340 kg was issued to prepare batch number211105.
of Nacl.
On 23 10 62 it got 5 kg.
The next day there was numberbalance but the infection department received 5 kgs.
Out of these 5 kg.
It received 5.0 kg against which the date was shown as 23 11 62.
On 1 11 62 it started with 5 kg.
were supplied to him on that day but he states that it was in fact supplied to him on the 12th November 1962 when he had to prepare another batch of glucose saline injections.
probably left out of the balance of what remained after the use in preparing batch No.
On 1 10 62 there was a balance of 2.120 kg.
Nothing was received on that day.
He gave me the four packages of 0.5 kg.
211101.
of sodium chloride with him and 5 kg.
Against this companyviction and sentence both the accused filed separate appeals before the Addl.
was issued to prepare batch No.
211104 from the balance of 1.18 kg together with 5 kg.
of sodium chloride from source or sources unknown because according to the Stores Register companysidered along with the Register of the Injection Department maintained by the appellant, there was numbersodium chloride in the stores during the relevant period from 8th to 23rd November 1962 and that the appellant has number been able to show the source from which he got the 2.340 kg.
In the month of November upto 11th, the register shows 10.5 kg.
It appears that the materials in stores had to be tested before, they were sent to the Department and the testing was done by the first accused, K. K. Prabhakaran, who was the head of the Laboratory.
The entire stock was issued for preparing batch No.
This 5 kg is shown in the receipt companyumn in the register on 11 11 62 which he thought must have been brought on 10 11 62 or on 12 11 62.
Sessions Judge, Baroda who acquitted them of the offences with which they were charged.
On 11 11 62 he says he had .015 kg.
211105 which companytained more than the permitted quantity of lead nitrate as a result of which 13 persons, to whom it was administered, died.
of sodium chloride out of which 9.25 kg.
In respect of Issue Slip No.
he says he used 2.340 kg.
201117.
The first accused was, however, acquitted.
A few of the relevant facts as alleged by the prosecution are number really in dispute.
S. C. I. Ltd. prepares glucose in numbermal saline, a solution companytaining dextrose, distilled water and sodium chloride popularly known as companymon salt .
2A 1525 of Sarabhai Merck Ltd., extra pure variety.
In the numbermal companyrse, some of the bottles which were sold by the companypany were purchased by different hospitals, nursing homes and medical practitioners and were administered to several patients of whom 13 persons died.
5 kg was received from the Laboratory so that on 10 11 62 there was 168 kg.
249 dated 1 10 62 which was number delivered to me was lying in the store and that 1 can take it and utilize it.
was received and, therefore, the balance was 5.0 kg.
The State of Gujarat appealed against the acquittal of both these accused.
On 8 11 62 it shows a balance of 3340 kg.
having been received by the injection department from the store.
He changed my slip from 3 kg.
They were of the B. No.
was issued for preparing batch No.
of my requisition slip No.
to 2 kg.
2 , a Chemist Incharge of the Injection Department of Sanitax Chemical Industries Ltd. Baroda hereinafter referred to as S. C. I. Ltd., along with 5 others was charged under Section 304A, I.P.C. for rashly and negligently manufacturing a solution of glucose in numbermal saline Batch.
This packet was the product of Sarabhai Merck.
Immediately after these deaths, a report having been made by the doctors who administered that they suspected adulteration or companytamination of the solution, that batch was withdrawn and about 125 bottles were sent for analysis by the Government Analyst.
It acquitted the other accused.
211101 to 211105 so that the allegation that the appellant did number have Sufficient sodium chloride available in his laboratory from 8 11 62 to 23 11 62 cannot be companyrect and is only explicable on he basis of what the appellant says, lamely, that he got 5 kg.
210101.
Against that Judgment this appeal is by certificate under Article 134 1 c of the Constitution.
was sent for from the stores.
was issued for preparing batch Nos.
211103.
on 12 11 62 for which he had issued a requisition slip on 1 10 62 on which date there is numberentry of 5 kg.
he gives as probably due to the fact that he had sent the requisition slip for that quantity to the stores on 23 11 62.
from which 1 665 kg.
brought from the laboratory without asking anybody while it was lying on the work bench.
On the relevant date, i.e. 11 11 62, the Injection Department had only 0.015 kg.
On 10 10 62 on the day when 2.160 kg.
294 dated 24 11 62, he says that it is for the same amount.
At the relevant time the first accused K. K. Prabhakaran was the Chief Analyst of the Testing Laboratory, accused R.M. Patel the third accused was the works Superintendent.
No sodium chloride was received but out of that quantity 2160 kg.
On 10 11 62 there was a balance of 1.180 kg.
The High Court as we stated earlier was of the view that the appellant had used 2.340 kg.
On 12 10 62 the balance shown is 2.840 kg.
was issued to prepare batch No.
The explanation for putting the date 23 11 62 as against this 5 kg.,
With respect to the supply of dextrose and sodium chloride to the Injection Department, he says the appellant had issued about 12 slips for sodium chloride and dextrose R.M. Patei was directing him to send materials for testing.
I brought them and prepared out of them B. No.
was issued for preparing batch No.
On the same day 2.160 kg.
211104.
This is what he states On 12 11 62 I had to prepare another batch of G. W. Saline injections.
Jaganmohan Reddy, J. The appellant original accused No.
The appellant in his statement to the Drug Inspector said that he had manufactured glucose in numbermal saline batch No.
It is, therefore, the case of Vaghjibhai that he only supplied raw materials on the requisition slip on the date when that slip was received, numberetheless he did admit that some times the material is supplied earlier and the requisition slip is sent later.
Regarding the purchase of raw materials he says that generally raw materials of standard quality were purchased and admitted that he had supplied sodium chloride for the batch referred to without getting it tested under the instructions of R.M. Patel.
The appellant has, however, denied that the requisition slip given by him on 1 10 62 for 3 kgs, out of which as stated by Vaghiibhai 2 kgs.
On 6 11 62, 5.0 kg.
of Nacl.
The High Court companyvicted the appellant and companyvicted the appellant and sentenced him to 8 months rigorous imprisonment as awarded by the trial Court but imposed numberfine.
There is numberreceipt and numberissue.
210107 the balance was 5 kg.
The trial Court companyvicted the appellant and K. K. Prabhakaran, the first accused and sentenced each of them to rigorous imprisonment of 8 months and a fine of Rupees 100/ , in default to serve 15 days rigorous imprisonment.
S. J. Mehta the fourth accused was Production Superintendent, Manibhai B. Amin, proprietor of M s. M. B. Amin and Company, Baroda, the fifth accused was the Managing Director, and H. M. Amin, the sixth accused, the son of the fifth accused was a Director and partner of S. C. I. Ltd. It was alleged that all these accused were responsible for the manufacture of the aforesaid solution companytrary to the provisions of the Drug Control Act and Rules and for the sale of it.
This statement of the appellant that the account books were number reliable and that 2 kgs.
We have checked up these entries and found that upto 11 11 62 the opening balance is companyrectly shown after taking into companysideration the receipt and the issue of that material.
of sodium chloride in respect of requisition slip given by him on 1 10 62 was supplied to him on 12 11 62 is borne out by other evidence.
I then again went to the stores, whereupon Waghajibhai who was on that day on duty told me that 2 kg.
used for the preparation on 10 10 62.
