JUDGMENT S. N. Pathak, J. – Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. 2. The petitioner is an accused in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 27(D), 18(A)(i), 18B, 22 (CCA Act) and 28 of the Drug and Cosmetic Act, 1940. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case and has not committed any offence. There is nothing on record to suggest that the petitioner has purchased/ sold the alleged sub-standard material as claimed. The petitioner is only the Superintendent of the ESIC Hospital. The decision to purchase medicines for the said Hospital are taken at the Headquarters and instructions are given to purchase the same from the Rate Contract Holders which was done in the instant case. The petitioner never used gauzed bandage/ cotton/ drugs. It is further submitted that the petitioner never manufactured any drug and gauzed bandage and he purchased the same on the direction of the Central Government. Petitioner is a reputed Doctors having sufficient means and there is no chance of his absconding. 4. Learned A.P.P. opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner. 5. Considering the fact and circumstances of the case, the above named petitioner in the event of his arrest or surrender before the Court below, shall be enlarged on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Saraikela-Kharsawan, in connection with Complainant Case No. 1/2014 (G.O. No. 2 of 2014), subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.