M/S VADSP PHARMACEUTICALS AND ORS(Not Applicable) vs UNION OF INDIA(Not Applicable) Advocate - ASGI — CRMMO/304/2022
Case under Code of Criminal Procedure Section 482. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Off on 06th May 2026.
CNR: HPHC010115082022
Filing Number
CRMMO/2624/2022
Filing Date
25-Apr-2022
Registration No
CRMMO/304/2022
Registration Date
27-Apr-2022
Judge
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma
Bench Type
Single
Judicial Branch
Criminal Section
Decision Date
06-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Disposed Off
Last updated 02-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.M/S VADSP PHARMACEUTICALS AND ORS(Not Applicable)
Adv. Karan Sharma
-
2.Vijay Kumar Uppal(Not Applicable)
Adv. Karan Sharma
-
3.Anand Uppal(Not Applicable)
Adv. Karan Sharma
Respondent(s)
-
1.UNION OF INDIA(Not Applicable) Advocate - ASGI
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
06-May-2026
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep SharmaView PDF
Case Summary: CRMMO 304/2022 Court: High Court of Himachal Pradesh Decision Date: May 6, 2026 The High Court quashed the criminal complaint against M/s VADSP Pharmaceuticals and its partners (petitioners) under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940. The court held that the complaint against the partner-petitioners (accused nos. 2 and 3) failed because it contained no specific averments showing they were "in charge of and responsible" for the company's business—a mandatory requirement under Section 34 of the Act. Since the company had appointed an authorized representative (Mr. Prem Nath, Chemical Analyst) responsible for manufacturing operations, the partners could not be vicariously liable merely by virtue of their partnership status. The court found the prosecution case bound to fail and continuing it would constitute abuse of process. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
02-Mar-2026
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep SharmaView PDF
-
27-Feb-2026
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep SharmaView PDF
-
03-Dec-2025
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Virender SinghView PDF
-
03-Dec-2025
Orders
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh
-
12-Nov-2025
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Virender SinghView PDF
-
12-Nov-2025
Orders
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh
-
15-Oct-2025
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Virender SinghView PDF
-
15-Oct-2025
Orders
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh
-
08-Oct-2025
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Virender SinghView PDF
-
08-Oct-2025
Orders
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh
-
10-Sep-2025
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Virender SinghView PDF
-
10-Sep-2025
Orders
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh
-
01-Sep-2025
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Virender SinghView PDF
-
01-Sep-2025
Orders
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh
-
25-Aug-2025
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Virender SinghView PDF
-
25-Aug-2025
Orders
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh
-
18-Aug-2025
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Virender SinghView PDF
-
18-Aug-2025
Orders
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh
-
11-Aug-2025
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Virender SinghView PDF
-
11-Aug-2025
Speaking To The Minutes
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh
-
04-Aug-2025
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Virender SinghView PDF
-
17-Jul-2025
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Virender SinghView PDF
-
16-Oct-2024
Additional Registrar(j)View PDF
-
27-Jul-2023
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sushil KukrejaView PDF
-
13-Dec-2022
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh ThakurView PDF
-
15-Oct-2022
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh ThakurView PDF
-
07-Sep-2022
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh ThakurView PDF
-
07-Sep-2022
Admission After Notice
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh Thakur
-
28-Jul-2022
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh ThakurView PDF
-
14-Jun-2022
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh ThakurView PDF
-
27-May-2022
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh ThakurView PDF
-
27-May-2022
Notice Before Admission
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh Thakur
-
28-Apr-2022
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh ThakurView PDF
-
28-Apr-2022
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
25-Apr-2022
Case filed
Registration No. CRMMO/304/2022
Case Summary: CRMMO 304/2022 Court: High Court of Himachal Pradesh Decision Date: May 6, 2026 The High Court quashed the criminal complaint against M/s VADSP Pharmaceuticals and its partners (petitioners) under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940. The court held that the complaint against the partner-petitioners (accused nos. 2 and 3) failed because it contained no specific averments showing they were "in charge of and responsible" for the company's business—a mandatory requirement under Section 34 of the Act. Since the company had appointed an authorized representative (Mr. Prem Nath, Chemical Analyst) responsible for manufacturing operations, the partners could not be vicariously liable merely by virtue of their partnership status. The court found the prosecution case bound to fail and continuing it would constitute abuse of process. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts