Registered Ayurvedic practitioners cannot prescribe Allopathy unless allowed by State law; improper complaint filing voids legal proceedings.

ORDER :

Tirumala Devi Eada, J.

This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioner-accused seeking to quash the proceedings against her in C.C.No.1492 of 2025 on the file of learned X Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Medchal, registered for the offences under Section 318 (4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita , 2023 (for short “ BNS ”), Section 22 of Telangana Medical Practitioners Registration (for short ‘TMPR’) Act,1968 and Section 34 read with 54 of National Medical Commission Act , 2019 (for short ‘ NMCA ’).

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner is a registered Ayurvedic Doctor. It is alleged that the petitioner is practicing Allopathy medicine, though she is qualified in Ayurvedic Medicine and that the said act of practicing allopathy medicine attracts the offences under Section 420 of IPC and Section 15(2) of the Indian Medical Council Act.

3. Heard the submissions of Sri L. Rajesh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Sama Sandeep Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for TMC for respondent No.2 and Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1 – State

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the allegations faced by the petitioner are that though she is a qualified Doctor in Ayurvedic, she is prescribing the medicines under Allopathy. He referred to the order, dated 02.09.2025, of the Co- ordinate Bench in Criminal Petition No.7668 of 2025 and Batch, wherein the Co-ordinate Bench has quashed the proceedings against the petitioners therein.

5. The learned Standing Counsel for TMC has argued that a person who is qualified in Ayurvedic, cannot prescribe the medicines under Allopathy and that it is a clear violation of the regulations and is punishable for the offences under Section 318 (4) of BNS , Section 22 of the TMPR Act and Section 34 read with 54 of the NMCA . He therefore, prayed to dismiss the Criminal Petition.

6. Perused the record.

7. Since the offences alleged are under Section 318 (4) of BNS , Section 22 of TMPR Act and Section 34 read with 54 of NMCA , the said Sections are pertinent to be referred in this context:-

Section 318 (4) of BNS “318. Cheating –

(1) xxx

(2) xxx

(3) xxx

(4) Whoever cheats and thereby dishonestly induces the person deceived to deliver any property to any person, or to make, alter or destroy the whole or any part of a valuable security, or anything which is signed or sealed, and which is capable of being converted into a valuable security, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.

Section 22 of TMPR Act

22. Whoever contravenes the provisions of clause(ii) of Section 20 shall be punishable on first conviction with imprisonment which may extend to three months or with fine which may extend to five hundred rupees or with both, and on any subsequent, conviction with imprisonment which may extend to six months or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees or with both.”

Sections 34 and 54 of NMCA

“34. Bar to practice – (1) No person other than a person who is enrolled in the State Registrar or the National Register, as the case may be, shall –

(a) be allowed to practice medicine as a qualified medical practitioner;

(b) hold office as a physician or surgeon or any other office, by whatever name called, which is meant to be held by a physician or surgeon;

(c) be entitled to sign or authenticate a medical or fitness certificate or any other certificate required by any law to be signed or authenticated by a duly qualified medical practitioner;

(d) be entitled to give ev