Court Orders Release of Inositol NF 12 to Petitioner: Compliance with Rules Key

The court ordered the respondents to release the goods, Inositol NF 12, to the petitioner within two weeks, subject to the petitioner providing necessary undertakings. The court emphasized that the import for non-medicinal use was exempt under Rule 43, and the petitioner's compliance with the DC Act and Rules warranted the release of the goods. The court also referenced previous judgments that supported the petitioner's case and highlighted the undue delay caused by the respondents.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Legality of import and sale of Inositol NF 12 without Form 10/NOC.
2. Applicability of Rule 43 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945.
3. Compliance with the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940.
4. Delay in testing and release of the goods.
5. Petitioner's entitlement to relief.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Legality of Import and Sale of Inositol NF 12 without Form 10/NOC:
The petitioner purchased 35,900 kgs of Inositol NF 12 from the fourth respondent, who imported it from China. The first and second respondents issued Form 15, restraining the petitioner from dealing with the goods, citing a contravention of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act (DC Act) due to the absence of Form 10 or No Objection Certificate (NOC). The respondents argued that the import required an import license under Section 10(c) of the DC Act, and the petitioner also violated Section 18 by purchasing without the necessary documentation.

2. Applicability of Rule 43 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945:
Rule 43 states that drugs specified in Schedule D, including substances not intended for medicinal use, are exempt from the provisions of Chapter III of the DC Act, subject to certain conditions. The court noted that the petitioner and the fourth respondent had indicated that the Inositol NF 12 was "Not for Medicinal Use," aligning with the exemptions provided under Rule 43. The court emphasized that the import was for non-medicinal purposes, such as food, nutraceutical, and beverage industries, and thus did not require Form 10.

3. Compliance with the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940:
The court examined whether the petitioner and the fourth respondent complied with the DC Act and Rules. It was determined that the import and sale of Inositol NF 12 for non-medicinal use were exempt under Rule 43, negating the need for Form 10. The court referenced previous judgments, including S.Kesarimal V. Commissioner of Customs (Imports), which supported the exemption for non-medicinal imports.

4. Delay in Testing and Release of the Goods:
The petitioner faced significant delays in getting the goods tested and released. Despite a court order on 10.10.2019 directing the respondents to test the goods within two weeks, the process was delayed, causing financial and operational hardships for the petitioner. The court acknowledged the petitioner's efforts to comply with all requirements and the undue delay by the respondents in providing the test reports and releasing the goods.

5. Petitioner's Entitlement to Relief:
The court concluded that the petitioner was entitled to relief based on compliance with Rule 43 and the non-medicinal use of the imported goods. The court directed the respondents to release the goods upon obtaining necessary undertakings from the petitioner, ensuring that the goods would not be used for medicinal purposes and providing periodic reconciliation data.

Conclusion:
The court ordered the respondents to release the goods, Inositol NF 12, to the petitioner within two weeks, subject to the petitioner providing necessary undertakings. The court emphasized that the import for non-medicinal use was exempt under Rule 43, and the petitioner's compliance with the DC Act and Rules warranted the release of the goods. The court also referenced previous judgments that supported the petitioner's case and highlighted the undue delay caused by the respondents.

---