- (1.) This appeal by special leave by the complainant, (the appellant before us) is directed against the judgment and order of the High Court of Karnataka refusing (sic) to quash the complaint filed by the appellant against the respondents for prosecution for offences under Section 18 (a) (vi) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act of 1940 (hereinafter "the Act") filed before the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore.
(2.) The petitioner's case was that the Drugs Inspector (the appellant before us) filed a criminal case against a firm, M/s Ashok Sharma and three of its partners for violation of the Act. The first accused is a partnership firm. The two respondents and one T. Krishnamurty, since dead were partners, of whom the third accused was a qualified medical practitioner and was the Managing partner of the firm. The firm was dealing in drugs. The allegation was that the accused had stocked drugs the potency of which had expired and had sold such drugs to the complainant. The complainant then lodged the complaint against the accused for the offence under Section 18 (a) (vi) of the Act and the Rules thereunder, punishable under Secs. 28 and 27 (b) of the Act. The Magistrate took cognizance of the offence and issued process against all the accused persons. Meanwhile, as stated above, accused Krishnamurty, died on 8-8-1974.
(3.) It was then contended by the respondents before the Magistrate, that the criminal case no longer survived against them as the only person who was managing the firm had expired. The Magistrate overruled the contention. He held "further the partnership (meaning the partnership deed as the partnership deed was filed before him, as it appears from item 13, page 20 of the paper book) shows that all the partners are responsible for carrying on the business." He fixed 10th of January, 1975 for evidence.;