Skip to content


Gyanendra Nath Mittal Vs. State - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtAllahabad High Court
Decided On
Case NumberCriminal Revn. No. 830 of 1957
Judge
Reported inAIR1959All634; 1959CriLJ1136
ActsDrusg Act, 1940 - Sections 25; Uttar Prades Drugs Rules, 1945 - Rule 45
AppellantGyanendra Nath Mittal
RespondentState
Appellant AdvocateChowdhary, Adv.
Respondent AdvocateAsst. Government Adv.
DispositionApplication allowed
Excerpt:
criminal - protocols - section 25 of drugs act, 1940 - report of government analyst - no mention of protocol - only result of test mentioned - result not in prescribed form - not a conclusive proof - rule 45 of u.p. drugs rules, 1945 - deprives the person from whom the sample was taken of his valuable right of giving notice to the inspector of the court that he intends to adduce evidence in contravention of the report - conviction of person from whom the sample was taken cannot bemaintained. - - the failure to give the protocols is a fatal defect because it deprives the person from whom the sample was taken of his valuable right of giving notice under section 25 to the inspector or the court that he intends to adduce evidence in controversion of the report......of the report.rule 46 of the united provinces drugs rules, 1945 lays down that after the test or analysis the result of the test or analysis together with full protocols of the test shall be supplied forthwith to the sender in form 13. the government analyst's report is in form 13. it has column no. 7, 'result of test or analysis with protocols of tests ap-plied.' in that column the government analyst has simply stated the result of the test but has not given the protocols at all. he has not mentioned what tests were applied and, therefore, the result is not in the prescribed form. when it is not in the prescribed form it cannot be conclusive evidence of the facts stated therein.the failure to give the protocols is a fatal defect because it deprives the person from whom the.....
Judgment:

M.C. Desai, J.

1. The applicant has been convicted under Section 27 of the Drugs Act for stocking and exhibiting for sale a drug, namely, tincture zingiberis mitis which was not of standard quality. There is the report of the Government Analyst to the effect that the sample of tincture zingiberis mitis taken from the applicant's shop was substandard. Section 25 of the Act requires that the Government Analyst to whom a sample of a drug is submitted for analysis should deliver to the Inspector submitting it a signed report in the prescribed form and lays down that a document purporting to a report signed by a Government Analyst is evidence of the facts stated therein and is conclusive unless the person from whom the sample was taken has, within 28 days of the receipt of a copy of the report, notified in writing to the Inspector or the court that he intends to adduce evidence in controversion of the report.

Rule 46 of the United Provinces Drugs Rules, 1945 lays down that after the test or analysis the result of the test or analysis together with full protocols of the test shall be supplied forthwith to the sender in Form 13. The Government Analyst's report is in Form 13. It has column No. 7, 'result of test or analysis with protocols of tests ap-plied.' In that column the Government Analyst has simply stated the result of the test but has not given the protocols at all. He has not mentioned what tests were applied and, therefore, the result is not in the prescribed form. When it is not in the prescribed form it cannot be conclusive evidence of the facts stated therein.

The failure to give the protocols is a fatal defect because it deprives the person from whom the sample was taken of his valuable right of giving notice under Section 25 to the Inspector or the court that he intends to adduce evidence in controversion of the report. If he does not know the protocols of the test or analysis, he cannot decide whether he should adduce evidence in controversion of the report and he is seriously prejudiced and his conviction cannot be maintained. I, therefore, allow this application, set aside the applicant's conviction and sentence and acquit him. His bail bonds are discharged and the fine, if realised, shall be refunded.

2. Let this defect in the Government Analyst's report be brought to the notice of the State Government.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //