HARBANS LAL, J. - (1.) THIS petition has been filed by Tejpal Singh sole proprietor of M/s T.S. Medical Store, Moga Road, Shahkot, District Jalandhar under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashment of FIR No. 93 dated 30th May, 2007, registered under Sections 420, 188 of Indian Penal Code, Section 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances, Act, (for short 'the NDPS Act') at Police Station Shahkot, Jalandhar.
(2.) THE facts in brief giving rise to this petition are that the petitioner is a Pharmacist, registered under Section 32(2) of the Pharmacy Act, 1948 vide Certificate No. 26139 valid upto 31st December, 2008. He has been issued five years drug licence No. 19440 NB and 19440 B dated 5th August, 2004 valid upto 4th August, 2009 for selling the retail medicines by State Drug Controlling and Licensing Authority, Punjab, Chandigarh alongwith an identity card. On 30th May, 2007, Station House Officer, Police Station Shahkot, District Jalandhar raided his shop and recovered the following medicines and empty boxes/strips vide seizure/recovery memo, which are reproduced below : "1. Tab Anaxil/Anaxinil 0.5 mg 900 (Alprazolam) 2. Tab Pruyum 2.5 mg 590 (Alprazolam) 3. Tab.Besquil 230 (Alprazolam) 4. Tab. Meriproz. 0.5 mg 400 (Alprazolam) 5. Tab. Dizivox 0.5 mg 120 (Diazepam) 6. Tab. Valium 5 mg 40 (Diazepam) 7. Cap Proxivon 8 empty strips 8. Cap Proxivon 2 empty boxes 9. Cap Parvon Spas 4 empty boxes 10. Spasmo Proxivon 1 empty box. 11. (Expired) date Syrups 8 bottles 12. Keta Nov (Expired) 9 injections. 13. Priton Syrup (expired) 1 bottle." Before raiding his shop, SHO on the basis of alleged secret information registered FIR No. 93 dated 30th May, 2007 under the aforementioned Sections against the petitioner on the allegations that he makes the youth consume intoxicating tablets and capsules posing these to be energy boosting drugs. The petitioner was arrested at the spot. While raiding his shop, no drug Inspector accompanied the police. The medicines seized/recovered by the police from his shop are manufactured under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 under the proper licenses taken by the manufacturers. Item No. 1 to 4 in the seizure list/memo contains salt Alprazolam which fall under Schedule H of Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945 at serial No. 15. Item Nos. 5 and 6 in the seizure list/memo contains salt Diazepam which too fall sunder Schedule H of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945 at serial no. 147. While items No.7 to 10 in seizure list/ memo are empty strips and boxes. Items No. 11 to 13 are expired medicines not worthy of sale/consumption. None of these is a prohibited drug either. Section 18 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, provides that for contravention in the provisions of the Act, complaint is to be filed by the Drug Inspector before the Magistrate under Section 23 of the Act after taking samples of the drug whereas in the present case, the Drug Inspector was not joined and thus, he had no occasion to draw any sample from the petitioner's shop and in this manner, the FIR is liable to be quashed.
(3.) IN reply filed by way of affidavit of Sh. Daljinder Singh Dhillon, PPS/DSP Sub Division Shahkot, District Jalandhar on behalf of respondents Nos. 1 and 2, it has been averred that the case is now fixed for recording the evidence of the prosecution witnesses on 11th April, 2008; that the petitioner had not challenged the order of framing of the charges against him and had filed the present petition for quashment of the FIR in question; that the petitioner is selling intoxicating drugs to the public by saying that the said medicines and drugs can enhance their energy and thus, cheating the people by deceitful means; that the dates of some of the drugs and injections had since been expired but even then petitioner was keeping the same. That the storage of dangerous drugs come under the commission of offence under Section 22 of the NDPS Act and the petitioner had not produced any license at the time of the raid; that Dr. Sukhjit Kaur Medical Officer, was joined in the party; that the petitioner had not produced any bills, invoices and cash memos during the investigation of the case and in these circumstances this petition may be dismissed with costs.;