Keeping Unlicensed Medicines On Clinic Rack Amounts To “Offer For Sale”, Violates S.27 Of Drugs & Cosmetics Act: HP High Court

The Himachal Pradesh High Court has held that stocking allopathic medicines without a valid license and keeping them on the racks of the clinic amounted to an “offer for sale” under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act and violates section 27 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, which prescribes punishment for selling drugs without a valid license.Rejecting the contention of the accused that mere possession is not an offence till there is direct proof of sale, Justice Rakesh Kainthla remarked that: “the drugs were found on the rack inside the clinic and learned Trial Court had rightly held that this violated Section 27 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act”.In June 2001, the drug inspector inspected the premises of M/s Maanav Health Clinic, McLeodganj. At the time of inspection, the accused, who was the clinic's owner, was present. The drug inspector noted that the accused had displayed a variety of allopathic drugs for sale; however, he could not produce any valid licence or certificate for them. Thereafter, the drug inspector seized the drugs and filed a complaint against the accused, contending that he was not authorised to sell the drugs as electropathy/Electro-homoeopathy is not recognised by the State Council of Homoeopathy or the Central Council of Homoeopathy. The Trial Court convicted the accused under Section 27(b)(ii) of the Drugs & Cosmetics Act. The Court held that if the medicines were found in the clinic of the accused, it means he had the intent to sell. Thus, the accused was sentenced to one month's simple imprisonment and was fined Rs 5000. The accused approached the High Court contending that the drug inspector did not prove that the drugs were meant for sale, which is an essential requirement under section 27(b)(ii) of the Drugs & Cosmetics Act.The High Court remarked that “Keeping the medicines in the racks of the shop amounted to an offer for sale and was prohibited”. Thus, the High Court upheld the trial court's submission and concluded that the accused had committed an offence under Section 27(b)(ii) of the Drugs & Cosmetics Act. Further, the High Court remarked that the possession of drugs by the accused without any license adversely affected public health and should be seriously viewed. “The impact of the Crime cannot be ignored and trial court was justified in doing that and the sentence of one month is excessive. The Court has to impose a deterrent sentence to dissuade people from playing with the lives of others by stocking the allopathic drugs for sale.”Case Name: Sanjay K. Maanav v/s State of Himachal PradeshCase No.: Cr. Revision No. 218 of 2012Date of Decision: 02.09.2025For the Petitioner: Mr. N.K. Thakur, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Karanveer Singh Thakur, Advocate.For the Respondents: Mr. Lokender Kutlehria, Additional Advocate General.Click Here To Read/Download Order

Keeping Unlicensed Medicines On Clinic Rack Amounts To “Offer For Sale”, Violates S.27 Of Drugs & Cosmetics Act: HP High Court

Mehak Aggarwal

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Keeping Unlicensed Medicines On Clinic Rack Amounts To “Offer For Sale”, Violates S.27 Of Drugs & Cosmetics Act: HP High Court

Mehak Aggarwal

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers