whether – the “manufactured drugs” – the present respondents – should be tried for the violation of provisions of Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 but not under sec.22 of NDPS Act. ?
Apex court held – No – While suspending the sentence pending appeal, the High court made unnecessary observation which was against settled law and as such set aside the order of High Court and held that we are unable to agree on the conclusion reached by the High Court for reasons stated further. First, we note that Section 80 of the N.D.P.S Act, clearly lays down that application of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act is not barred, and provisions of N.D.P.S. Act can be applicable in addition to that of the provisions of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act. The statute further clarifies that the provisions of the N.D.P.S Act are not in derogation of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940. – Additionally, it is the prerogative of the State to prosecute the offender in accordance with law. In the present case, since the action of the accusedRespondents amounted to a primafacie violation of Section 8 of the N.D.P.S Act, they were charged under Section 22 of the N.D.P.S Act.