The Supreme Court in its recent judgment affirmed a fine of Rupees One Lakh but set aside an imprisonment order imposed on a doctor in a case related to the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940. Justices B.R. Gavai and Sanjay Karol observed that imposing a sentence of imprisonment would be unjustified, particularly when the intent to sell/distribute under Section 18(c) of the Act has not been proven.

Senior Advocate S. Nagamuthu represented the Appellant, while Senior Advocate Joseph Aristotle represented the State. The appeal concerned a High Court order that upheld the decision of the Additional District & Sessions Judge, who had modified the Chief Judicial Magistrate's order.

The case originated from an inspection of a clinic on October 13, 2015, where officials found allopathic medicines meant for distribution without proper documentation. The Trial Court convicted the appellant, but the lower Appellate Court overturned the conviction for one offense due to a lack of proof regarding the drugs' intended sale or distribution.

The appellant filed a criminal revision, which was dismissed for lack of perversity or infirmity in the lower court's orders. The Court noted that the appellant was convicted under Section 18A read with Section 28 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, pertaining to the disclosure or non-disclosure of the manufacturer's name.

The Bench noted the precedent of S. Athilakshmi v. State Rep. by The Drug Inspector, where a doctor was acquitted of stocking a small amount of drugs due to the insignificant quantity not constituting selling medicines over the counter. Given the small quantity of medicines found and the non-disclosure of the manufacturer's name, which was the only remaining aspect, the Bench concluded that it did not pose a threat to public interest.

Furthermore, considering the appellant's profession, the Bench deemed imposing a prison sentence unjustified, especially since the intent to sell or distribute was not proven. Therefore, the Court modified the judgment, setting aside the imprisonment sentence and allowing the appeal.

Case: Palani vs. The Tamil Nadu State, 

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO...OF 2024 (@Petition for Special Leave Appeal (Crl.) No.256 OF 2022). 

Click to read/download judgment.