The long pendency of the case itself before this Court has become a primary contributory factor in allowing the present petition given the fact that the petitioner’s grievance concerning the loss of the option of re-testing the sample in question.: Jammu Kashmir and Ladakh High Court
The Jammu Kashmir and Ladakh High Court passed a judgement on the 7th of December, 2022 in which the petition was allowed by the high court. This was seen in the case of M/S Amazon Drugs Pvt. Ltd vs State Of J&K And Others (CRMC No. 124/2012 IA No.141/2012). The case was presided over by The Honourable Mr Justice Rahul Bharti.
FACTS OF THE CASE:
The petitioner was a drug manufacturing company for the manufacturing sale distribution of drugs. The petitioner reckoned itself aggrieved of the institution of a criminal complaint. The factual background in which the said complaint came to be instituted is that the Drug Inspector of District Udhampur had come to lift samples of Tablets NOVA 650 from the premises of M/s Neeraj Medical Hall. This sample of the drug was sent to the Govt. Analyst for analysis and in response thereto the Govt. analyst came to declare the drug so examined as not of standard quality. The petitioner through his letter came forward with its statement of facts on the case situation and exercised the right of re-testing the drug in question from the Central Laboratory.
This right was denied to the petitioner and the case pending since a decade. Due to the long pendency of the case the instant petition was thus allowed in the court.
JUDGEMENT:
The petition was allowed and the criminal complaint which was pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate was hereby quashed.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
JUDGEMENT REVIEWED BY KRITI GUPTA