READ ONCE | POWER CORRUPTS : ABSOLUTE POWER CORRUPTS ABSOLUTELY

Pharma courses

pharma courses



S. 27 is further amended vide Drugs and Cosmetics (Amendment) Act 2008 notified on 10th August 2009 reading as under:

27. Penalty for manufacture, sale, etc., of drugs in contravention of this Chapter.—whoever, himself or by any other person on his behalf, manufactures for sale or for distribution, or sells, or stocks or exhibits or offers for sale or distributes, -

(a) any drug deemed to be adulterated under section 17A or spurious under section (17B and which) when used by any person for or in the diagnosis, treatment, mitigation, or prevention of any disease or disorder is likely to cause his death or is likely to cause such harm on his body as would amount to grievous hurt within the meaning of section 320 of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860), solely on account of such drug being adulterated or spurious or not of standard quality, as the case may be, shall be (punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than ten years but which may extend to for life and shall also be liable to fine which shall not be less than ten lakh rupees or three times value of the drugs confiscated, which ever is more);

"Provided that the fine imposed on and released from, the person convicted under this clause shall be paid, by way of compensation, to the person who had used the adulterated or spurious drugs refered to in this clause:

Provided further that where the use of the adulterated or spurious drugs refered to in       this clause has cause the death of a person who used such drugs, the fine imposed on      and realised from the person convicted under this clause, shall be paid to the relative     of the person who had died due to the use of the adulterated or spurious drugs refened to in this clause.

 Explanation.- Not being reproduced being irrelevant for the purpose of this article.

(b) any drug—

(i) deemed to be adulterated under section 17A, but not being a drug referred to in clause (a), or
(ii)  without a valid licence as required under clause (c) of section 18,
shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall (not be less than three years but which may extend to five years and with fine which shall not be less than one lakh  rupees or three times the value of the drugs confiscated, whichever is more):
Provided that the Court may, for any adequate and special reasons to be recorded in the judgment, impose a sentence of imprisonment for a term of (less than three years and of fine of less than one lakh rupees);

(c)  any drug deemed to be spurious under section 17B, but not being a drug referred to in clause (a) shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall (not be less than seven years but which may extend to imprisonment for life and with fine which shall not be less than three lakh rupees or three times the value of the drugs confiscated, whichever is more):
Provided that the Court may, for any adequate and special reasons, to be recorded in the judgment, impose a sentence of imprisonment for a term of less than three years but not less than one year;

(d)  any drug, other than a drug referred to in clause (a) or clause (b) or clause (c), in contravention of any other provision of this Chapter or any rule made there under, shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than one year but which may extend to two years (and with fine which shall not be less than twenty thousand rupees):
Provided that the Court may, for any adequate and special reasons, to be recorded in the judgment imposes a sentence of imprisonment for a term of less than one year.

COGNIZANCE OF OFFENCE

Section 32 as amended in the years 1982 and 1986:
S. 32    (1) No prosecution under this chapter shall be instituted except by an Inspector or by the person aggrieved or by a recognized consumer association whether such person is a member of that association or not (Ins.. by Act of 1986 w.e.f. 15.9.1987).
(2)  No Court inferior to that of a Metropolitan Magistrate or of a Judicial Magistrate of the First Class shall try an offence punishable under this chapter.( Subs. by the Act 68 of 1982 w.e.f. 1.2.1983)
(3)  Nothing contained in this chapter shall be deemed to prevent any person from being prosecuted under any other law for any act or omission which constitutes an offence against this chapter.

Section 32A was amended in the year 1982 as under:
S. 32A Power of Court to implead the manufacturer etc.-   Where, at any time during the trial of any offence under this chapter alleged to have been committed by any person, not being the manufacturer of a drug, or cosmetics or his agent for the distribution thereof the Court is satisfied, on the evidence adduced before it, that such manufacturer or agent is also concerned in that offence, then, the Court may, notwithstanding any thing contained (in sub-sections (1),(2) and (3) of section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973), proceed against him as though a prosecution had been instituted against him under section 32.( Subs. by act 68 of 1982 w.e.f. 1.2.1983)

Section 32 (1) and (2) are further amended and notified in the year 2009 as under:
S. 32 (1) No prosecution under this chapter shall be instituted except by-
(a)  an Inspector; or
(b)  any gazetted officer of the Central Government or a State Government authorized in writing in this behalf by the Central Government or a State Government by a general or special order made in this behalf by that Government; or
(c )  the person aggrieved; or
(d)  a recognised consumer association whether such person is a member of that association or not.

(2)   Save as otherwise provided in this Act, no Court inferior to that of a Court of Session shall try an offence punishable under this chapter.[Drugs and Cosmetics (Amendment) Act 2008 notified vide no. S.O. 2076 (E) dated 10.08.2009]

Abstract from 59th Report on Functioning of the Central Drugs Standard Control Organisation (CDSCO) by Department-Related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Health and Family Welfare- Presented to the Rajya Sabha and Lok Sabha on 8th May 2012

(viii)  CDTL, Hyderabad is yet to be equipped, and other five CDL/CDTL at Calcutta, Mumbai, Chennai, Gauhati and Chandigarh were reasonably equipped but not fully equipped and required upgradation with the state-of-the-art facilities for testing / analyzing complex formulations and detect spurious, misbranded, substandard and adulterated drugs.(Para 5.1, Page 20)

(ix)    The Ministry admitted that the State Drug Testing Laboratories are not fully equipped with adequate manpower and infrastructure. (Para 5.5, Page 21)

(x)     Chennai State Drug Testing Laboratory having only two HPLC bought more than a decade ago which had become obsolete. (Para 5.7, page 21)

NOW YOU CAN ALSO PUBLISH YOUR ARTICLE ONLINE.

SUBMIT YOUR ARTICLE/PROJECT AT articles@pharmatutor.org

Subscribe to PharmaTutor Alerts by Email

FIND OUT MORE ARTICLES AT OUR DATABASE


 

Pages

FIND MORE ARTICLES