P&H: Drugs and Cosmetics - Quashes drug prosecution against manufacturer over delayed analyst report and non-speaking summoning order

punjab-haryana
⚖️ Order Date: 29 Jul 2026
Headnotes

(i) Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940, S.25(3) — Government Analyst’s report — Statutory period of 28 days — Reply to show-cause notice sent beyond 28 days from service of report — Petitioner could not claim non-compliance of Section 25(3). (Para 8)

(ii) Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945, R.45, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.482 — Duties of Government Analyst — Quashing of proceedings — Report to be furnished within 60 days of receipt of sample — Where analysis was done after more than 5 months and no...

(iii) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Ss.202, 482 — Summoning of accused — Quashing — Summoning order that does not specify offences initially and remains non-speaking even after correction cannot be sustained — Magistrate must independently examine material and record prima facie satisfaction before setting the...


Facts of the Case

P&H: Drugs and Cosmetics - Quashes drug prosecution against manufacturer over delayed analyst report and non-speaking summoning order

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has quashed criminal proceedings against Ankit Aggarwal in a drugs case, holding that the prosecution was vitiated by an unexplained delay in the Government Analyst’s report and by a mechanical summoning order passed by the trial court.

The case arose from an inspection of M/s Nitin Medicose on 22 August 2024, where a sample of Capsule Ceemox-L was drawn and later found by the Government Analyst to be “not of standard quality.” The complaint traced the supply chain back to the manufacturer, M/s Greycross Healthcare, formerly M/s Alentia Pharma, and the petitioner was arrayed...

Login required to open full judgment PDF
Login to Access File