Criminal Application No.2064 of 2000

6th January, 2009

Petitioner Counsel: Shri. S. V. CHANDOLE
Respondent Counsel: Smt. S. B. WADMARE

JUDGMENT

JUDGMENT:-The present Criminal application is filed praying that the F.I.R. dated 21st July, 2000 in connection with Crime No.75/2000 under section 420 of Indian Penal Code r/w. section 33 of Maharashtra Medical Practitioner's Act, 1961 filed in Police Station, Degloor, be quashed and set aside and further, the respondents be directed to withdraw the prosecution filed in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Degloor on 21.7.2000 in aforesaid crime.

2. Background facts of the case are as under.

It is the case of the petitioner that he is qualified medical practitioner under section 17 of the Indian Medicine Central Council Act, 1970, but was not registered under section 33 of Maharashtra Medical Practitioner's Act, 1961. The petitioner started practicing at Degloor.

3. On 21st July, 2000, the F.I.R. was lodged against the petitioner, petitioner was arrested and produced before the Court and remanded to M.C.R. The petitioner was released on bail.

4. The present petition is filed by the applicant with grievance that the police authorities without following judgment and order in writ petition No.329/95, provision of Maharashtra Medical Practitioner Act, resolution dated 5.9.1991, 25.11.1992, 23.2.1999, took penal action . It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that F.I.R. does not disclose any offence completed under any law, therefore, this application is filed for quashing the F.I.R. It is further submitted that the action of the respondent is illegal, they do not have authority to file F.I.R. against the petitioner when the petitioner has not committed any offence. It is further submitted that F.I.R. filed by respondent does not disclose any offence since there is no prohibition to administer the allophatic drugs to patient when the petitioner is registered medical practitioner as per law. It is further submitted that the action of respondent is violative of Article 19(1)(g) of Constitution of India. It is further submitted that the action of the respondent No. 6 violates the fundamental right guaranteed to the petitioner under Article 21 of Constitution. It is further submitted that it is none of the business of the police to inquire in to the concerned subject matter since the Medical Council has to look in to the issue. Therefore, it is submitted that the F.I.R. which is lodged by the respondent does not disclose any offence against the present applicant, therefore, the said F.I.R. and subsequent prosecution on the basis of the said F.I.R. should be quashed and set aside.

5. The learned A.P.P. vehemently opposed the application and submitted that the applicant without having been registered his name under the Maharashtra Medical Practitioner's Act, started practicing medicine at Degloor, therefore, the F.I.R. clearly discloses the offence committed by the present applicant.

6. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the applicant and learned A.P.P. appearing for the State. This Court on 5th June, 2003 granted rule in the matter and today this matter is for final hearing before this Court.

7. I found considerable substance in the arguments advanced by the applicant. Not only that, the perusal of the record and the document called "AN ADDENDUM TO THE MEDICAL LIST OF PRACTITIONERS UNDER THE MAHARASHTRA MEDICAL PRACTITIONER'S ACT, 1961" (Containing names of Practitioners included in the register under the M.M.P. Act, 1961) clearly discloses that the name of present applicant i.e. Pabbawar Shrinivas Baliram on page No. 138 showing his address in front of his name at Degloor. Said document further shows the registration No.I-33184 and the date of registration as 22nd May, 1998. Therefore, in my considered view, as the name of the applicant is included in the above document, the police officers were not justified arresting the applicant.

8. The learned counsel appearing for the applicant has invited my attention to the order passed by this Court in Criminal Application No.2065/2000 in which identical issue was involved. This Court in para 7 of the said Order has observed thus:-

"7.To verify the genuiness of the certificate is the job of the said Medical Council and not the job of the police. In fact, when it was disclosed by the petitioner that he is a registered medical practitioner and that too in Maharashtra, the Police should have fairly conceded for quashing the First Information Report and/or should have submitted the summary to the Magistrate for disposal of the First Information Report. This Court finds that there is no offence in view of the registration under the Indian Medical Central Council Act, 1970 and therefore, the First Information Report is quashed. The Police are directed that they should not further investigate the crime and shall not harass the applicant in any way."

9. In my considered view, since the petitioner's name appears in the above mentioned document and the list of doctors, registration number is mentioned, date of registration is also mentioned, therefore, the prayer made by the applicant is reasonable. In the result the F.I.R. dated 27th July, 2000 in Crime No.75/2000 under section 420 of Indian Penal Code r/w. 33 of Maharashtra Medical Practitioners Act, 1961 filed in Police Station, Degloor, is quashed and set aside. Respondents are directed to withdraw the prosecution filed in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Degloor on 21.7.2000 in Crime No.75/2000 under section 420 of I.P.C. r/w. section 33 of Maharashtra Medical Practitioner's Act, 1961. With this direction, the application is disposed of.

Application allowed.