Back
2022 Supreme(MP) 1394
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH AT INDORE
Satyendra Kumar Singh, J.
Major Dr.Kanhaiyalal Patidar – Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
Misc. Criminal Case No. 59450 of 2021
Decided On : 09-11-2022
Shri Vinay Gandhi, Advocate, for the Appellant; Shri Amit Singh Sisoda, Govt. Advocate, for the Respondent
The genuineness of the registration certificate and its unimpeachable character played a crucial role in quashing the charges against the applicant.
Headnote:
M.P. Ayurvigyan Parishad Adhiniyam 1987 - Medical Practitioner - Section 24 - Penalty - If any person whose name is not enrolled on the State Medical Register practices as a registered Medical Practitioner, he shall be punishable with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and with fine which may extend to five thousand rupees; Provided that - (i) the person possessing Bachelor in Ayurvedic with Modern Medicine and Surgery degree and registered with the Madhya Pradesh Board of Ayurvedic and Unani systems of Medicine and Naturopathy shall not be punishable under this section for prescribing allopathic medicines or practicing surgery if his registration certificate authorizes him to do so; (ii) the Medical Practitioner entitled to the privileges of Section 27 of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 (No.102 of 1956) shall not be punishable under this section for his non-registration in Madhya Pradesh.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant, a registered medical practitioner, was charged under Section 24 of M.P. Ayurvigyan Parishad Adhiniyam 1987 for organizing a health camp and practicing without registration with the M.P. Medical Council. The applicant argued that he was duly registered and produced his registration certificate.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the applicant's registration certificate was genuine and of unimpeachable character, ruling out the assertions contained in the charges. Allowing the prosecution to continue would amount to an abuse of the process of the Court, and thus, the proceedings against the applicant were quashed.
Issues: The main issue was whether the applicant, a registered medical practitioner, was practicing without registration with the M.P. Medical Council, as alleged.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court relied on the genuineness of the applicant's registration certificate and the provisions of Section 24 of Adhiniyam 1987 to rule that the charges against the applicant were not made out. It also applied the steps outlined in the case of Rajiv Thapar and others Vs. Madan Lal Kapoor to determine the veracity of the prayer for quashing raised by the accused.
Final Decision: The miscellaneous criminal case was allowed, the FIR was quashed, and the criminal proceedings against the applicant were set aside. The impugned orders were also set aside.
JUDGMENT
1. This petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been preferred against the order dated 7.9.2021, passed by the Court of 3rd Addl. Sessions Judge, Barwah, District Mandleshwar (West Nimar) in Cr. Rev.No.6/2021, whereby the order dated 20.2.2020 passed by the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Barwah, framing the charge against the applicant for the offence punishable under Section 24 of M.P. Ayurvigyan Parishad Adhiniyam 1987 [in short Adhiniyam 1987], was affirmed.
2. Brief facts giving rise to this petition are that on 29.8.2021 at about 11.00 AM, Block Medical Officer, Block-Barwah, Complainant Dr. Anuj Karkhur received an information that an illegal health camp was being organized by the applicant at Agrasen Dharamshala, Barwah, wherein physician sample (not for sale) as well as expired medicines were given to the people illegally. Complainant alongwith his staff members namely Maneesh Mandloi, Rajendra Sharma and Naib Tehsildar Barwah, Rahul Solanki went there and found applicant alongwith other co-accused persons examining the people without having certificate of registration with M.P. Medical Council in terms of the provisions of Adhiniyam 1987 and giving to them physician sample (not for sale) as well as expired medicines. On being asked applicant and his associates co-accused persons did not produce their registration certificates. Complainant recovered the medicines found on the spot and made written complaint dated 2.9.2019 to SHO P.S., Barwah, on the basis of which FIR was lodged against the applicant and other co-accused persons. After completion of investigation charge sheet was filed before the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Barwah. Learned Trial Court vide order dated 20.02.2022, framed the charges against the applicant and co-accused persons for the offence punishable under Section 24 of Adhiniyam 1987, against which applicant filed criminal revision bearing No. 6/2021 before the Court of 3rd Addl.Sessions Judge, Barwah, which was dismissed vide impugned order dated 7.9.2021.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant completed his M.B.B.S. degree in the month of November-December, 2006 from Armed Forces Medical College, Pune affiliated to Maharashtra University of Health Sciences, Nashik. After taking compulsory rotating internship training from 6.2.2007 to 5.2.2008, he registered his name in the Indian Medical Council Register as per registration certificate dated 22.2.2008. Applicant joined Indian Army in the year 2007 as a Medical Officer as a Short Service Commissioned Officer. In the year 2012 he was granted substantive promotion to the rank of Major and thereafter retired in the year 2014. He completed his Doctor of Medicine (Dermatology, Venereology and Leprosy) from Armed Forces Medical College Pune and moved to Madhya Pradesh in the year 2018 and got himself registered with the M.P. Medical Council in terms of Adhiniyam 1987. He further got additional registration certificate in lieu of his additional qualification of M.D. He is operating skin clinic in the name of 'Mayra Skin and Asthetics Clinic' at Mhow. He further submits that complainant Dr. Anuj Karkhur unnecessarily interfered in the Health Camp organized by the applicant and co-accused persons with ulterior motive and when applicant objected, he made false complaint against the applicant. Since applicant is a registered medical practitioner and is duly registered with Indian Medical Council and M.P. Medical Council and is duly enrolled on Indian Medical Register and State Medical Register, offence punishable under Section 24 of Adhiniyam 1987, is not made out against him. Prosecution has intentionally not taken on record the certificates of the applicant. The registration certificate produced by the applicant has been verified by the respondent and of unimpeachable character of sterling quality, and can be considered at the initial stage as held by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of Orissa Vs.
