Bombay High Court Quashes FIR in Drugs and Magic Remedies Act Case — Advertisement of Ayurvedic Medicine Not Objectionable as It Did Not Claim Cure for Diseases Listed in the Act. The court held that joint and knee pains are not specified in the Schedule to the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954, and no prima facie case under Section 420 IPC was made out.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: AURANGABAD In Favour of Accused
  • 66
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The applicants, Dheeraj Kachrulal Patonda and Hitesh Rajendra Sharma, filed an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking quashing of FIR No. I-328 of 2018 registered at Police Station Satara, Aurangabad, for offences under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and Sections 3(B), 4, and 7 of the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954, along with the consequent criminal proceeding RCC No. 1216 of 2019. The applicants were businessmen involved in marketing medicinal products under the name 'Indiyana Distribution Network LLP' at Indore, Madhya Pradesh. The first informant, Rajesh Bhaurao Patil, a resident of Aurangabad, came across an advertisement on YouTube for an Ayurvedic medicine called 'Asthijivik', which claimed to be an accurate treatment for joint and knee pains. He placed an online order and purchased four bottles of the oil and liniment. After using the product, he found it ineffective and lodged the FIR. The applicants contended that the advertisement did not claim to cure any disease specified in the Schedule to the Drugs and Magic Remedies Act, and therefore no offence was made out. They also argued that the ingredients of cheating under Section 420 IPC were absent. The State and the complainant opposed the application. The High Court examined the provisions of the Act and noted that Section 3 prohibits advertisements of drugs for treatment of diseases enumerated in the Schedule, which includes diseases like asthma, diabetes, etc., but not joint or knee pains. The court held that the advertisement for 'Asthijivik' did not fall within the prohibited category, and no prima facie case under the Act was made out. Regarding Section 420 IPC, the court observed that there was no allegation of dishonest inducement at the time of purchase; the complainant voluntarily purchased the medicine after seeing the advertisement. The mere fact that the medicine did not yield the desired result does not constitute cheating. Consequently, the court allowed the application, quashed the FIR and all consequential proceedings.

Headnote

A) Criminal Procedure Code - Quashing of FIR - Section 482 Cr.P.C. - Abuse of Process - The High Court has inherent power to quash criminal proceedings to prevent abuse of process of court. The court examined whether the advertisement for Ayurvedic medicine 'Asthijivik' claiming treatment for joint and knee pains fell within the mischief of the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954. Held that the advertisement did not claim to cure any disease specified in the Schedule to the Act, and therefore no prima facie offence was made out. (Paras 1-10)

B) Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954 - Sections 3, 4, 7 - Objectionable Advertisement - The Act prohibits advertisements of drugs for treatment of diseases specified in the Schedule. The advertisement in question claimed that the medicine 'Asthijivik' would be an accurate treatment for joint and knee pains. Since joint and knee pains are not listed in the Schedule, the advertisement is not objectionable under the Act. Held that the FIR and proceedings are liable to be quashed. (Paras 5-10)

C) Indian Penal Code - Section 420 - Cheating - Ingredients of cheating not made out - The complainant purchased the medicine after seeing the advertisement and used it. There was no allegation of dishonest inducement or deception at the time of purchase. The mere fact that the medicine did not work as claimed does not constitute cheating. Held that no case under Section 420 IPC is made out. (Paras 5-10)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the FIR and criminal proceedings for alleged offences under Section 420 IPC and Sections 3(B), 4, and 7 of the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954, should be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. on the ground that the advertisement did not fall within the prohibited categories under the Act.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The application is allowed. FIR No. I-328 of 2018 registered at Police Station Satara, Aurangabad, and criminal proceeding RCC No. 1216 of 2019 are quashed and set aside.

Law Points

  • Quashing of FIR under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
  • Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act
  • 1954
  • Sections 3
  • 4
  • 7
  • Indian Penal Code Section 420
  • Ayurvedic medicine advertisement
  • no prima facie case
  • abuse of process of law
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2019 LawText (BOM) (06) 30

Criminal Application No. 116 of 2019

2019-06-26

T.V. Nalawade, K.K. Sonawane

Mr. A.P. Shejul for Applicants, Mr. D.R. Kale APP for Respondent No. 1, Mr. N.K. Kakade for Respondent No. 2

Dheeraj S/o Kachrulal Patonda and Hitesh S/o Rajendra Sharma

The State of Maharashtra and Rajesh S/o Bhaurao Patil

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Criminal application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR and criminal proceedings.

Remedy Sought

Quashing of FIR No. I-328 of 2018 and criminal proceeding RCC No. 1216 of 2019.

Filing Reason

The applicants alleged that the FIR and proceedings were based on an advertisement that did not violate the Drugs and Magic Remedies Act and lacked ingredients of cheating.

Issues

Whether the advertisement for Ayurvedic medicine 'Asthijivik' claiming treatment for joint and knee pains falls within the prohibition under Sections 3(B), 4, and 7 of the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954. Whether the ingredients of offence under Section 420 IPC are made out against the applicants.

Submissions/Arguments

Applicants argued that the advertisement did not claim to cure any disease specified in the Schedule to the Act, and no dishonest inducement was made out for cheating. Respondents argued that the advertisement was misleading and the medicine was ineffective, constituting offences under the Act and IPC.

Ratio Decidendi

The advertisement for Ayurvedic medicine 'Asthijivik' claiming treatment for joint and knee pains does not fall within the prohibition under the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954, as joint and knee pains are not diseases specified in the Schedule to the Act. Further, no prima facie case of cheating under Section 420 IPC is made out as there was no dishonest inducement at the time of purchase. Hence, continuation of proceedings would be an abuse of process of court.

Judgment Excerpts

The advertisement did not claim to cure any disease specified in the Schedule to the Act. No prima facie case under Section 420 IPC is made out. The FIR and proceedings are quashed.

Procedural History

The applicants filed Criminal Application No. 116 of 2019 under Section 482 Cr.P.C. before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, seeking quashing of FIR No. I-328 of 2018 and RCC No. 1216 of 2019. The court heard the parties and delivered judgment on 26 June 2019.

Acts & Sections

  • Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.): Section 482
  • Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC): Section 420
  • Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954: Section 3(B), Section 4, Section 7
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Appeal of Daily Wage Employees in Unfair Labour Practice Case — Employer's Failure to Produce Attendance Records Leads to Adverse Inference. The court held that non-production of attendance registers by the employer under S...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Third Party Claim in Execution Proceedings — Flat Not Attachable as Judgment Debtor's Property. Court holds that attachment of immovable property in execution requires strict compliance with Order 21 CPC and that third part...