Supreme Court: In an appeal alleging that the Bihar State Pharmacy Registration Council is issuing registration certificates on the basis of fake certificates, the Division Bench of M.R. Shah and M.M. Sundress, JJ., issued notice to the Bihar government asking why no steps had been taken to desist functioning of fake pharmacies in the State.
The appellants had also alleged that it was also alleged that the Council is granting certificates on the basis of experience gained by the person, which is completely against the provisions of the Pharmacy Act, 1948.
Noticeably, at the relevant time, the Pharmacy Council of India/Bihar State Pharmacy Council constituted a fact-finding committee, and its report was already forwarded to the State Government. However, nothing is on record regarding the steps taken by the State Government to stop the fake pharmacists functioning in the State.
The Court opined that permitting the fake pharmacists to run the medical stores and/or functioning, would be playing with the life of the citizens. Hence, the State ought to have been vigilant to curb and stop the fake pharmacists.
Resultantly, the Court directed the State to place on record by way of counter affidavit, what steps are taken to stop the fake pharmacists from functioning and more particularly, on the basis of the report submitted by the fact-finding Committee. Further, the Court granted leave to join the Bihar State Pharmacy Council as respondent and issued a notice returnable on 21-11-2022.
[Mukesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1586, decided on 07-11-2022]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
Rachitta Rai, AOR, Advocate for the Appellants;
AORs Abhinav Mukerji and Zoheb Hossain, Advocates Pratishtha Vij, Bihu Sharma, Akshay C. Shrivastava, Advocates, for the Respondent(s).
*Kamini Sharma, Editorial Assistant has put this report together.