Dr.Navaneeth K.Unni vs State Prepresented By Public ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 5021 Ker

Kerala High Court

Dr.Navaneeth K.Unni vs State Prepresented By Public ... on 15 February, 2024

Author: Bechu Kurian Thomas

Bench: Bechu Kurian Thomas

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                           PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
 THURSDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 26TH MAGHA, 1945
                   CRL.MC NO. 6638 OF 2018
 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN CC 2914/2015 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
                  OF FIRST CLASS ,CHAVAKKAD
PETITIONER/RESPONDENT/ACCUSED:

          DR.NAVANEETH K.UNNI
          AGED 30 YEARS
          S/O A.K.UNNIKRISHNAN, RESIDING AT KOOVAKKATT HOUSE,
          GANESAMANGALAM, VATANAPPILLY P., THRISSUR, PIN
          680614.
          BY ADV REENA ABRAHAM


RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT/STATE:

    1     STATE PREPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
          HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN 682031.
    2     DRUGS INSPECTOR (INTELLIGENCE BRANCH)
          OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT DRUGS CONTROLLER, THRISSUR,
          PIN 680001
    3     HERING PHARMA
          X/5378, SAHRUDAYA LANE, MALIKAPEEDIKA, ALANGAD PO,
          ERNAKULAM, PIN 683511, REPRESENTED BY MANAGING
          PARNTER, PIN 683511
    4     SRI.ABDUL RAHIMAN
          AGED 62 YEARS
          RESIDING AT NIAZ MANZIL, P.O.KARA, KODUNGALLUR,
          THRISSUR, PIN 680671
          BY ADVS.
          ADDL.DIRECTOR GENERAL OF PROSECUTION
          SMT.C.P.JYOTHY


          SRI. T.R. RANJITH (PP)

     THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
15.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
 CRL.MC NO. 6638 OF 2018

                                    2

                    BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
              ----------------------------------------
                    Crl.M.C No. 6638 of 2018
              ----------------------------------------------
              Dated this the 15th day of February, 2024


                             ORDER

Petitioner is the 1st accused in C.C.No.2914/2015

before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Chavakkad.

He seeks to quash all proceedings against him in the above

case. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under

Sections 18(c) and 22(1)(cca) of the Drugs and Cosmetics

Act, 1940 ('the Act' for short).

2. The proceedings in C.C.No.2914/2015 arose out of

a private complaint filed by the Drugs Inspector on the basis

of information received from Sri.P.P.Jomon, who alleged that

petitioner is a 'fraud Doctor' practicing Homeopathy after

stocking and selling Homeopathic medicines from the

premises of 'M/s Panacea Homeo Clinic', Vadanappilly

Junction, Thrissur without any authority. Pursuant to the

complaint, the Drugs Inspector conducted an enquiry which

revealed that bills of homeopathic medicines were kept in the

clinic, without the accused having any drug license nor any CRL.MC NO. 6638 OF 2018

qualification to practice as a Medical Practitioner. The

complaint also alleged that the accused registered himself as

a homeopath on 10.06.2013 and hence the purchase and

storing of medicines prior to that date was without authority

and contrary to provisions of Section 18(c) of the Act. It was

also alleged that accused had procured homeopathic

medicines in violation of Section 22(1)(cca) of the Act and

thereby committed the offences alleged.

3. Smt.Reena Abraham, learned counsel for the

petitioner contended that, the petitioner is a Homeopathic

Practitioner duly registered on 10.06.2013 and that the

inspection was conducted only on 15.07.2013, wherein, the

medicines purchased prior to his registration as a

Homeopathic Practitioner were allegedly seized. It was

submitted that even if the entire allegations in the complaint

are assumed to be admitted, still none of the offences are

made out as petitioner's father himself was a Homeopathic

Medical Practitioner and that the Clinic was being conducted

prior to 10.06.2013 and after 10.06.2013, by petitioner's

father. According to the learned counsel, the fact that CRL.MC NO. 6638 OF 2018

petitioner's father was a Homeopathic Medical Practitioner

even on the date of inspection is admitted as is evident from

Annexure-A4, which is not even disputed and therefore, the

homeopathic medicines purchased and stored in 'Panacea

Homeo Clinic' cannot be said to be procured illegally or in

violation of the Act.

4. Sri.Grashious Kuriakose, the learned Additional

Director of Prosecution assisted by Sri.T.R.Renjith, learned

Public Prosecutor contended that on the date of inspection

that is, 15.07.2013 though the petitioner had been registered

as Homeopathic Medical Practitioner, the bills seized from the

building indicated purchase of medicines in January 2012 and

May 2013, all of which were prior to the date of registration of

the petitioner as a Doctor. According to the learned Public

Prosecutor, the exemption granted Under Rule 123 of the

Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945 are not applicable to the

petitioner and the same is available only to a person, who is a

registered Medical Practitioner and on the date of

procurement of the medicines by the petitioner, he was not a

registered Medical Practitioner.

CRL.MC NO. 6638 OF 2018

5. I have considered the rival contentions.

6. Concededly, petitioner's father was a Medical

Practitioner on the date of inspection and even before that

Annexure-A4 indicates that petitioner's father became a

registered Homeopathic Doctor, as early as on 10.06.1998

and the said registration was valid even on the date of

inspection. Therefore, the procurement of medicines and

payment in 2011, 2012 and 2013 cannot be said to be per se

illegal, since it was procured for the Homeopathic Clinic

conducted by petitioner's father. Merely because petitioner's

could have personally collected the medicines cannot be

treated as procurement by the petitioner. The medical clinic

was also being run by the petitioner's father who all the valid

licenses under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act for purchasing

stocking and selling such medicines.

7. Apart from the above, on the date of inspection

which is 15.07.2013, the petitioner had already become a

registered Medical Practitioner. In the above perspective, I am

of the view that no purpose would be achieved by continuing

the prosecution. The entire prosecution allegation even if it is CRL.MC NO. 6638 OF 2018

assumed to be correct would not make out any offence

against the petitioner.

8. In a recent decision in Priyanka Mishra v. State

of Kerala [2023 SCC Online Sc, 978] the accused should

be protected against vexations and unwanted criminal

prosecution and from unnecessarily being put through the

rigours of an eventual trial. Further, in the decision in

Religare Finvest Ltd v. State of NCT of Delhi [2023 SCC

Online SC 1148], it was held that though the power to

quash criminal proceedings should not be lightly exercised,

refusal to take recourse to that power, in cases hat require or

demand it would be like being blind to justice, which the

Courts can scant afford to be.

9. While considering the question whether the power

under Section 482 should be exercised or not, the Court must

always be guided by the principles laid down in the provision

itself i.e, to prevent the abuse of process of the Court or to

secure the ends of justice. In the instant case, this Court is

satisfied that both those parameters are satisfied. The

complaint is required to be quashed to prevent the abuse of CRL.MC NO. 6638 OF 2018

process of Court and also to secure the ends of justice.

10. Accordingly, all proceedings in C.C.No.2914/2015

pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Chavakkad

are hereby quashed.

This Crl.Miscellaneous Case is allowed.

Sd/-BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, JUDGE lsn CRL.MC NO. 6638 OF 2018

PETITIONER ANNEXURES ANNEXURE A1 TRUE COPY OF THE HOMEO MEDICAL REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE DATED 10.06.2013 ISSUED FROM TAMIL NADU HOMEOPATHIC MEDICAL COUNCIL ANNEXURE A2 TRUE COPY OF THE HOMEO MEDICAL REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE DATED 10.06.2013 ISSUED FROM TAMILNADU HOMEOPATHIC MEDICAL COUNCIL ANNEXURE A3 TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE DATED 27.08.2013 ISSUED BY THE REGISTRAR, COUNCIL OF HOMEOPATHIC MEDICINE, KERALA STATE UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF TRAVANCORE COCHIN MEDICAL PRACTITION'S ACT 1953 ANNEXURE A TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE OF PETITIONER'S FATHER DATED 10.06.1998 ISSUED BY THE SECRETARY ALL KERALA HOMEOPATHIC ASSOCIATION (REGD) ALLEPPEY ANNEXURE A5 TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 02.06.2007 EXECUTED BETWEEN PETITIONER'S FATHER AND SRI. ABDUL RAHIMAN ANNEXURE A6 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE MANAGER MERCHANTS WELFARE SOCIETY, VYABHARA BHAVAN BUILDLING, ALMAVU (JN), VATTANAPPILLY, DATED 09.04.2005

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL

TRUE COPY

P.A TO JUDGE

LSN