In Brief
A medical shop owner was prosecuted under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act for stocking and selling drugs without a valid licence and failing to disclose the supplier. The trial court and first appellate court convicted him, but the High Court reversed the conviction, holding that the non-examination of former licence holders was fatal. The Supreme Court allowed the State's appeal, reasoning that the respondent's own written admissions (Exs. P-4 and P-7) acknowledging he had no licence eliminated the need to examine those witnesses. The Court also upheld that carbon copies are admissible as primary evidence and dismissed the unsubstantiated claim that signatures were obtained on blank papers. The conviction was affirmed but the sentence was reduced from one year to three months on grounds of age of the offence and absence of prior convictions.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.