The prosecution produced in evidence of the charge that the drug was misbranded within the meaning of s. 18 a ii , that is, its label bore a statement which was false as being at variance with the companyponents of the drug, a certificate to that effect given by the Government Analyst.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated April 24, 1963, of the Madras High Court in Criminal Appeal No.
Ranganadham Chetty and A. V. Rangam, for the respondent.
On appeal by the appellant to the Sessions Judge, that companyviction was set aside and the appellant was acquitted.
22 of 1961.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No.
40 of 1964.
Hence the present appeal by special leave.
125 and in default of payment of the fine, to rigorous imprisonment for one month.
Thiagarajan, for the appellant.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Sarkar, J. The appellant was companyvicted by a learned magistrate under s. 18 a ii read with s. 27 of the Drugs Act, 1940 for having manufactured for sale and also exhibited for sale a drug known as OKSAL which did number companytain the ingredients in the proportion mentioned in the label pasted on the companytainer of the drug.
On appeal by the State to the High Court of Madras, the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge was set aside and the companyviction and sentence passed by the learned magistrate were restored.
