Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:110506 Court No. - 79 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 23571 of 2015 Applicant :- M/S Shariq Medicose And Anr. Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr. Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Shukla,Mohd Aadil Siddiqui Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J. 1. Heard Sri Mohd. Aadil Siddiqui, learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State-opposite party and perused the record. 2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant praying for quashing of summoning order dated 23.03.2015 passed by the Additional District Judge, VII, Moradabad in Complaint Case SST No. 48 of 2015 (State vs. M/s Shariq Medicose & others), under sections 18(a)(i), 18(a)(vi) and 18(b), 16(1)(a), 17 and 27(d) of the Drugs & Cosmetics Act, 1940, Police Station Katghar, District Moradabad. 3. Record reflect that the applicant no. 2 running a firm, marked as applicant no. 1 in the instant application, and engaged in the business of retail selling of drugs under the wrath of the Drugs & Cosmetics Act, 1940, having a valid license renewed time to time. During a joint raid conducted by a team comprising Drug and Excise Inspector on 28.01.2011, a drug namely Urgenia Tincture I.P. was found in the possession of the Firm purchased from the distributor, M/s Verma Medical Store. In this regard a notice was served upon the applicant on 14.02.2011. Applicants filed reply to the said notice and thereafter, being not satisfied by the reply submitted by the applicants, Inspector of Drugs, Moradabad filed a compliant against 8 persons including the applicant before the Additional District Judge-VII, Moradabad on 26.02.2015. Learned Additional District Judge-VII, Moradabad took cognizance and issued summoning order dated 23.03.2015, the same has been assailed by means of the instant application. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are retailer and having a valid license of Medical Store. He further submits that the medicines were purchased from some other company, however the same has been denied by the seller. He further submits that he is not the manufacturer of the drug and also not knowing whether the drugs were sub standard or not, therefore the summoning order issued by the concerned court is sheer abuse of process of law, as the same has been issued without considering the fact that the same has been purchased by the applicant from other company, therefore, the summoning order issued against the applicant be quashed. 5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the application and contended that there is report of Drug & Cosmetic Act at page 30, which clearly shows that the medicines sold by the applicant was of sub standard. He further contended that applicants without having valid license was selling spurious and sub standard drug to the peoples, therefore, court concerned rightly summoned the applicants and no interference is required by this Court in the impugned order as well as the on going proceedings. 6. Considering the submission advanced by learned counsel for the parties, perusal of material on record and looking into the facts of the case, at this stage, prima facie, it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicants. The summoning order dated 23.03.2015 has been issued after looking into the complaint and after adducing the evidence. 7. The argument raised by the applicants are all disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court. 8. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335 and in the cases of M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra, AIR 2021 SC 1918, R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192, and lastly, Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283 has held that only those cases in which no prima facie case is made out can be considered in an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 9. The instant application does not fall under the guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the judgements mentioned above, and followed in a number of matters. Moreover, the facts as alleged cannot be said that, prima facie, no offence is made out against the applicants. It is only after the evidence and trial, it can be seen as to whether the offence, as alleged, has been committed or not. 10. However it is open for the applicant to take all its defence in the trial. 11. Hence, the instant application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot be entertained and is, accordingly, dismissed. However, this case is lingering on since last 10 years, the trial court is directed to complete the trial within one year without giving any unnecessary adjournment. 12. Registrar compliance is directed to send a copy of this order to the court concerned. Order Date :- 10.7.2025 Bhanu Digitally signed by :- BHANU PRATAP KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad