Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940; Section 18A ,28 – Both these provisions concern the disclosure or non-disclosure respectively of the name of the manufacturer – In this case, the quantities of the 29 kinds of medicines recovered from the clinic run by the Appellant, were of small quantity. In such a situation, non-disclosure of the name of the manufacturer/person from whom the said medicines were acquired, cannot be said to be endangering public interest (which obviously, is the primary object of the prohibition in law) by allowing the circulation of such substances unauthorizedly -Imposing a sentence of imprisonment would be unjustified, particularly when the intent to sell/distribute under Section 18(c) of the Act has been held unproven. Therefore, we find it fit to modify the impugned judgment, set aside the sentence of imprisonment as awarded, and instead thereof, impose a fine of Rs.1,00,000/- on the Appellant.
Criminal Trial – Sentencing – A proper sentence is an amalgam of many factors pertaining to the offence itself as also others such as prior record if any, age, record of employment, education, home life, social adjustment and emotional and mental conditions of the offender etc. – Referred to Mohammad Giassudin v. State of Andhra Pradesh (1977) 3 SCC 287. (Para 8}