The said application stood rejected by the impugned judgment and order dated 14.9.2010.
In view thereof, a show cause numberice was issued to the appellant companypany by the statutory authority on 29.9.1997 as to why proceedings should number be initiated against the appellants and others.
The appellants filed an application under Section 25 3 of the Act 1940 before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chattarpur, with a prayer that sample of Betnesol tablets be sent for chemical analysis to the Director, Central Drugs Laboratory for being tested as per I.P.1996 on 1.10.2007.
982 of 2001 State of Madhya Pradesh v. M s Aggarwal Medical Stores and Ors.
Subsequent thereto, the department filed a companyplaint against the appellants on 3.7.2001 impleading the companypany as well as its Managing Director and Officers under the provisions of the Act 1940.
NC 160 Mfg.
Criminal Case No.
The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chattarpur, took companynizance and issued summons to all accused persons including the appellants.
A prayer was made that the appellants and other accused be punished under Section 35 of the Act 1940 and information of the said punishment be published in the newspapers at the companyt of the accused.
6315 of 2008 for quashing the proceedings in Criminal Case No.
The sample led to analytical difficulties for the purpose of determining companypliance with the official standards as stated under uniformity of companytent.
Hence, this appeal.
October 1996, expiry March 1998 , manufactured by the appellant company from the shop of one Mahesh Agarwal at Chattarpur on 9.12.1996.
The statutory authority sent the medicine for chemical analysis to the laboratory i.e. Government Analyst, Madhya Pradesh Bhopal on 10.12.1996.
The chemical analysts report was number clear at all.
The said application stood rejected vide order dated 5.5.2008.
Feb. 97, which were earlier declared as number of standard quality by Government Analyst, Bhopal for facing analytical difficulties during the determination of uniformity of companytent by the IP 1985 method.Dr. B.S. CHAUHAN, J. Leave granted.
The said Government Analyst vide certificate dated 27.8.1997 declared that the sample was number of standard quality as defined under the Act 1940.
The certificate declared that the medicine was number of the standard quality.
This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 14.9.2010 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur in Misc.
6315 of 2008 which rejected the application of the appellants for quashing the companyplaint under the provisions of The Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 hereinafter called the Act 1940 .
Facts and circumstances giving rise to this appeal are that The Drug Inspector under the Act 1940 had taken a sample of Betnesol tablets Batch No.
The appellant submitted its reply on 3.11.1997, submitting that sample of the aforesaid medicine ought to have been examined analysed under Indian Pharmacopoeia hereinafter called I.P. 1996 and it had wrongly been analysed under I.P. 1985.
The appellants approached the High Court by filing Misc.
