TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1964 (3) TMI 121
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he drug (Olive Oil) was sub-standard. On receipt of the report the Inspector of Drugs filed a complaint against the applicants alleging that they had committed an offence punishable under Section 27 read with Section 18 of the Drugs Act, 1940 (to be referred hereinafter as the Act). The complainant led evidence as to the supply of the Olive Oil by Messrs. P. Cool & Co. Ltd., Lucknow, the taking of the sample and also the report of the Government Analyst. No attempt was made to prove who the partners or directors of the Firm were and to what extent the applicants were responsible to the Company. The applicants, however, made a statement as if they were the partners of this Company. 3. The Magistrate discharged the applicants of the offence,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l be deemed to be guilty of the offence. Similarly, under sub Section 12 of Section 34 director, manager, secretary or other officer of the Company can also be deemed to be guilty if it is proved that the offence was committed with his consent or connivance or is attributable to any neglect on his part. 6. A reading of Sections 27 and 34 of the Act shall make it clear that the following category of persons can be convicted of the offence under Section 27: (a) the actual seller; (b) the principal on whose behalf the sub-standard drug was sold; (c) in the case of a Company, the Company itself; and also (i) every person in charge of, and responsible to the Company for the conduct of the business of the Company ; and (ii) director, m....