The Drugs Inspector vs Sasikumar, Proprietor, Advocate - S. Dhanraj — 363/2023
Case under Drugs & Cosmetics Act, 1940 Section 32,18(c),65(2),65(3)(1),65(4)(3)(i),27(d)DCAct. Status: Questioning. Next hearing: 15th May 2026.
STC - Small Cause Calendar case / Summary Trial Case
CNR: TNTM150003962023
Next Hearing
15th May 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
396/2023
Filing Date
01-07-2023
Registration No
363/2023
Registration Date
01-07-2023
Court
Judicial Magistrate Court, Vandavasi
Judge
1-Judicial Magistrate,Vandavasi
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
The Drugs Inspector
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
Sasikumar, Proprietor, Advocate - S. Dhanraj
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Judicial Magistrate,Vandavasi
Questioning
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 22-04-2026 | Questioning | |
| 15-04-2026 | Evidence | |
| 06-04-2026 | Evidence | |
| 10-03-2026 | Evidence | |
| 25-02-2026 | Evidence |
Interim Orders
Summary This is a witness deposition document (not a court judgment with an outcome order). A 39-year-old witness testified in Case No. S.T.C.363/2023 before the Judicial Magistrate Court, Vandavasi, regarding an investigation into alleged illegal sale of medicines at a pharmacy during the COVID-19 pandemic, in violation of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940. The witness provided detailed testimony about regulatory violations found during an inspection, including improper storage, missing documentation, and unauthorized sale of restricted medicines, ultimately supporting prosecution charges under Sections 65(2), 65(3)(1), and 65(4)(3)(i) of the Act. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary This is a witness deposition document (not a court judgment with an outcome order). A 39-year-old witness testified in Case No. S.T.C.363/2023 before the Judicial Magistrate Court, Vandavasi, regarding an investigation into alleged illegal sale of medicines at a pharmacy during the COVID-19 pandemic, in violation of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940. The witness provided detailed testimony about regulatory violations found during an inspection, including improper storage, missing documentation, and unauthorized sale of restricted medicines, ultimately supporting prosecution charges under Sections 65(2), 65(3)(1), and 65(4)(3)(i) of the Act. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts