Don’t let guilty use red-tapism to escape punishment: HC to drugs authority

The court was quashing proceedings against Jammu-based drug manufacturer Emcure Pharmaceuticals Limited on the grounds that there was a delay in obtaining the lab report

The competent authority under the drugs control department must register a crime quickly and ensure the guilty does not go scot-free on the plea of limitation, the High Court of Karnataka has said.

The court issued directions while quashing proceedings against Jammu-based drug manufacturer Emcure Pharmaceuticals Limited on the grounds that there was a delay in obtaining the lab report and registration of complaint against them regarding a sub-standard drug.

“The authority should also necessarily peruse and understand the statute for registration of crimes in such matters, as delay will defeat the very object of penal action under the statute, and it is always said that procrastination is the thief of time,” Justice M Nagaprasanna said.

Emcure moved the petition challenging the trial court order taking cognizance of the complaint under Section 27(d) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940.

Case background

The drug inspector, Bengaluru, visited one Tulasi Pharma on January 5, 2012, and sent the sample of a drug manufactured by Emcure to the laboratory for analysis. On July 21, 2012, the inspector received the lab report terming it to be ‘not of standard quality’ for ‘Assay for Folic Acid’.

The inspector chose to seek sanction for registration of crime after about a year, on October 8, 2013. The drugs controller accorded the sanction on December 8, 2017, and the complaint was registered on January 2, 2018.

The company contended that the offence alleged is under Section 27(d), which mandates punishment for a maximum term of imprisonment of two years, and the limitation would run from the date on which the inspector receives the sample from the laboratory. It contended that there is a delay of more than five-and-a-half years.

Justice Nagaprasanna noted that for a prosecution under Section 27(d) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, sanction would be required only if the drugs are either Ayurvedic, Siddha or Unani. But the drugs in the case at hand are Allopathic.

“... it becomes necessary to direct the competent authority to register the crime in such cases, in quick succession and not resort to red-tapism and let the alleged guilty go scot-free on the plea of limitation,” the court observed.