High Court Patna High Court - Orders

Rajendra C.Bora &Amp; Ors vs The State Of Bihar &Amp; Anr on 21 July, 2010

Patna High Court – Orders
Rajendra C.Bora &Amp; Ors vs The State Of Bihar &Amp; Anr on 21 July, 2010
                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              Cr.Misc. No.22451 of 2010
    1.   RAJENDRA C.BORA, CHAIRMAN-CUM-MANAGING DIRECTOR, LITAKA PHARMACEUTICALS
         LTD. NEW TWILIGHT LITAKA PHARMA LTD. R/O 257/10 GREEN PARK SOCIETY BEHIND
         ANAND PARK, AUNDHA, PUNE.
    2.   VASUDEO K. NAYAK, DIRECTOR, LITAKA PHARMACEUTICALS LTD. NEW TWILIGHT
         LITAKA PHARMA LTD. R/O C/5 AMIT APARTMENT 491, GOKHLE ROAD, PUNE.
    3.   ABINASH S. CHANDVANKAR, DIRECTOR LITAKA PHARMACEUTICALS LTD. NEW TWILIGHT
         LITAKA PHARMA LTD. R/O TIRUPATI APARTMENT N.R. CHAITANYA HOSPITAL, 133/B,
         SINGHAD ROAD BEHIND BHUSBAL GARRAGE, PUNE.
    4.   SANJIV DINKAR TOLE DIRECTOR & SECRETARY LITAKA PHARMACEUTICALS LTD. NEW
         TWILIGHT LITAKA PHARMA LIMITED RESIDENT OF PRASANNA PLOT NO. 1 KANCHAN
         GANGA CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY BIOBWEWADI, PUNE.--PETITIONERS
                                        Versus
    1.   THE STATE OF BIHAR
    2.   INSPECTOR OF DRUG-CUM-CHIEF HOSPITAL PHARMACIST, PATNA MEDICAL COLLEGE
         AND HOSPITAL, PATNA.                                    - OPPOSITE
         PARTIES
                                     -----------

2 21.7.2010 An application was filed for restoring the application to

its original file. Although the quashing application on behalf of the

petitioners has been dismissed on two earlier occasions i.e. on

21.11.2008 and 9.4.2010. This Court was inclined to give the

petitioners a chance and hear the matter on merit.

The petitioners have filed this application for quashing

the order of cognizance dated 1.10.2003 passed in Special Case No. 3

of 2003 alleging offences under Section 27 (d) of Drugs and

Cosmetics Act. The petitioners are employees of the pharmaceutical

company. The allegation is that on inspection of the C & F agent of

the pharmaceutical company it was found that he maximum retail

price (M.R.P.) printed on the medicine was higher than notified by the

National Pharmaceuticals Pricing Authority, Government of India.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the

company was not responsible for the said printing and further submits

that no recovery was made from the premises of the company.
2

This Court finds no reason to interfere with the order

impugned. These aspects or any other point may be raised at the time

of framing of charge.

This application is dismissed.

Sanjay                                     (Sheema Ali Khan, J.)