DRUG INSPECTER vs MS INDIA LABORATORIES PVT LTD Advocate - P P Sandeepkumar — 753/2015

Case under Drugs and Cosmetics Act 1940\ Section 17B(d)AND18(a)(i). Disposed: Contested--Acquitted u/s 248(1) CrPC on 21st March 2026.

CC - CALENDAR CASE

CNR: KLKN210006012015

Case disposed

Filing Number

753/2015

Filing Date

17-07-2015

Registration No

753/2015

Registration Date

17-07-2015

Court

Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Payyannur

Judge

3-Judicial First Class Magistrate

Decision Date

21st March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Acquitted u/s 248(1) CrPC

Acts & Sections

Drugs and Cosmetics Act 1940\ Section 17B(d)AND18(a)(i)

Petitioner(s)

DRUG INSPECTER

Adv. Asst. Public Prosecutor

Respondent(s)

MS INDIA LABORATORIES PVT LTD Advocate - P P Sandeepkumar

NARENDRA R PATEL

Hearing History

Judge: 3-Judicial First Class Magistrate

21-03-2026

Disposed

16-03-2026

Order/Judgement

12-03-2026

For further hearing

26-02-2026

For further hearing

21-02-2026

Adjourned

Final Orders / Judgements

21-03-2026
Judgement

Summary The court acquitted both accused under Section 248(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code of charges related to manufacturing and selling substandard/spurious drugs under Sections 17B(d) and 18(a)(i) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act 1940. The magistrate found fatal procedural defects in the complaint (Accused No.2 mischaracterized as a "partner" of a private limited company), unexplained delays in sample testing (10-16 months), violations of mandatory requirements under Section 23, and conflicting lab reports rendering the evidence unreliable for conviction. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The court acquitted both accused under Section 248(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code of charges related to manufacturing and selling substandard/spurious drugs under Sections 17B(d) and 18(a)(i) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act 1940. The magistrate found fatal procedural defects in the complaint (Accused No.2 mischaracterized as a "partner" of a private limited company), unexplained delays in sample testing (10-16 months), violations of mandatory requirements under Section 23, and conflicting lab reports rendering the evidence unreliable for conviction. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Payyannur All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case