Authority: Supreme Court of India
Order Date: 06 August 2026
Case Overview
- Parties: Appellant Anil Kumar Gupta (director of Addom Pharmaceuticals Private Limited) vs. State of Punjab.
- Origin: Appeal against the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh order dated 06‑04‑2026 that rejected bail in connection with FIR No.34 of 2025 registered at Police Station Special Task Force, District Mohali.
- Allegations: Possession of narcotic drugs exceeding commercial quantity; drugs allegedly supplied through C.S. Enterprises located in Uttarakhand. Employee Radhika Bhardwaj stated she met co‑accused Sangam Kumar to meet sales targets and earn commission, resulting in medicines being sold to firms under his control.
- Legal Points Raised:
- Counsel for appellant argued possible vicarious liability under Section 38 of the NDPS Act but claimed lack of knowledge and that he exercised due diligence, seeking defence under Section 22.
- State counsel opposed bail, stating the defence must be proved at trial, highlighted seizure of fake bills, but acknowledged that the company held a valid licence under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940.
- Court Observations: Recognised appellant’s one‑year pre‑trial incarceration, absence of prior criminal antecedents, and that the company possessed a valid licence.
Final Outcome
- The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court’s order rejecting bail, and directed that the appellant be released on bail subject to conditions imposed by the trial court. All pending applications, if any, are disposed of.
Topics: Bail, NDPS Act, Pharmaceutical Licensing