Delhi District Court
State vs Madan Kumar on 19 March, 2024
IN THE COURT OF MS. UPASANA SATIJA, ACMM,
WEST, TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI
State v. Madan Kumar
FIR No. 172/2014
u/s 419 IPC & 27 DMC ACT
PS: Patel Nagar
Unique Case I.D No.DLWT02-18200-2016.
JUDGMENT
Serial No. of the case 11232/2016
Date of commission of offence 24.03.2014
Date of institution of case 20.12.2016
Name of the complainant Dr. Girish Tyagi
Name of Accused, parentage Madan Kumar
& Address S/o Sh. Bali Karan
R/o 2116/1 A6 Gali no.7,
Prem Nagar, Delhi.
Offence complained u/s 419 IPC & 27 DMC ACT
Offence for which charge was u/s 420 IPC & 27 DMC Act
framed
Plea of Accused Pleaded not guilty
Date on which judgment was 15.03.2024
reserved
Final Order Convicted for offence u/s 27 DMC
Act
Acquitted for offence u/s 420 IPC
Date of Judgment 19.03.2024
Brief Statement and Reasons for Decision:
1. The present case arises out of FIR registered upon complaint of Dr. Girish Tyagi, Secretary Delhi Medical Council (hereinafter referred to as 'Complainant'). Upon completion of the investigation, the chargesheet was filed under Section 27 FIR No. 199/2017 State v. Ajay Sharma Page 1 of 22 Delhi Medical Council Act (hereinafter referred to as 'DMC Act') and Section 419 Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as IPC) against Madan Kumar s/o Sh. Bali Karan (hereinafter referred to as 'accused').
2. The case of prosecution, in brief, can be stated as that at Health Care Clinic, 2116/1A6, Gali no.7, Prem Nagar, Patel Nagar, Delhi accused was found practicing allopathic system of medicine without possessing requisite medical qualification. Further it was found that accused in furtherance of his dishonest intention had made general public believe that he is a lawful medical practitioner and had prescribed and given the medicine to the public and had also obtained money in exchange.
3. The cognizance was taken and the copy of chargesheet was supplied to the accused.
4. Vide order dated 16.04.2018, Ld. Predecessor was of the opinion that the material on record prima facie disclosed the commission of offence under Section 420 IPC and Section 27 DMC Act. The charge was accordingly framed against the accused to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial and hence, this Court conducted trial.
5. For proving its case, prosecution examined ten witnesses.
5.1. SI Balbir was examined as PW1. He deposed that on 24.03.3014, he was posted at PS Patel Nagar as ASI and FIR No. 199/2017 State v. Ajay Sharma Page 2 of 22 on that day, investigation of the present case was marked to him after registration of FIR. Thereafter, he alongwith Ct. Azad went to H. No. 2116 Call No 7, Prem Nagar, Delhi, where one Health Care Clinic was running and one person was sitting there on the chair of the Doctor as Doctor Madan Kumar. After due enquiry, accused Madan Kumar disclosed that he is running this clinic by the name of Health Care Clinic and he is the only doctor here Thereafter, one slip pad was recovered from him on which medicinal prescription was written by hand and at the bottom of which it was mentioned "to purchase the above mentioned medicine contact Sh. Shyam Medicos, 2101/1-B, in front of School, Gali no. 13, Prem Nagar, Delhi". Thereafter, he seized the prescription slip vide seizure memo, which is Ex. PWI/A, bearing his signature at point A. The seized prescription slips were exhibited as Ex. P1 (colly). Thereafter, he took photographs of the clinic from outside and inside alongwith the accused with his mobile phone showing the board of the clinic and the accused person inside the clinic and some medicines were also visible in the photographs behind the accused. The said photographs were exhibited as Ex. P2 to P5 (colly). After that he prepared the site plan at the instance of the complainant, which is Ex. PW1/B. During the investigation, he made interrogation from Madan Kumar accused in the present case regarding the incident who disclosed all about the incident and told him that he was running the alleged clinic on rent at 2116/A-1 Gall no. 7, Prem Nagar. During investigation, he prepared arrest memo and personal search memo of the accused which are Ex. as PW-1/C and Ex. PW-1/D. He also recorded the disclosure statement of the FIR No. 199/2017 State v. Ajay Sharma Page 3 of 22 accused Madan Kumar is Ex. PW-1/E. He also recorded the statement of the witnesses in the present case. During the investigation, he served a notice U/s 91 Cr.PC (Ex. PW-2/I) to collect the relevant documents from the secretary Delhi Medical Council. In the reply of said notice, he collected documents (Ex. PW-2/J). During the investigation, he also made interrogation from the concerned Doctor and recorded their statement U/s 161 Cr.PC. Thereafter, he prepared charge sheet and filed before concerned Court.
PW1 was cross examined by ld. Counsel for accused. During his cross-examination, he stated that he had conducted investigation in the present case as present case was assigned to him through SHO concerned. He did not remember if he made departure entry before leaving the PS. He did not verify the education degree of the accused Doctor what was told by him. He did not make any inquiry question regarding the education degree from complainant Grish Tyagi. He did not record the statement of complainant Grish Tyagi. He is the IO of the present case. The documents marked as Mark A (Colly) were already annexed in the file when the present case was assigned to him for investigation. He made his best efforts to join the public person for investigation but all of them denied. The place of incident was residential area. He did not seize any medicine from the clinic. He did not remember if he had recorded the statement of Doctor Girish Tyagi in the whole investigation. He did not make any documentary investigation before arresting the accused. He did not make site plan of the clinic. No investigation was conducted about the handwriting of the Madan Kumar. He FIR No. 199/2017 State v. Ajay Sharma Page 4 of 22 did not remember to whom he had informed regarding the arrest of accused. He remained at the spot for about one and a half hours. He did not remember if he made arrival entry. He admitted that concerned SHO was not joined in the investigation. At the relevant time duty officer was HC Sukhpal. He admitted that he did not record the statement of HC Sukhpal.
5.2. Complainant/Dr. Girish Tyagi was examined as PW2. He deposed that on 17.11.2011, he received an inspection/survey report from CDMO, West District regarding practice of allopathic medicine by unqualified personal. In the said report at serial no. 8, name of present accused Madan Kumar Vedkar was mentioned. The certified copy of the same report was exhibited as Ex. PW2/A. On the basis of this report, he issued show cause notice to the accused namely Madan Kumar Vedkar on 27.06.2012 to appear before the Delhi Medical Council on 6th July. The certified copy of the same was exhibited as Ex. PW2/B. On 6 July, 2012, the accused appeared before the Anti Quackery Committee and admitted his practice as Allopathic Medicine and also submitted a performa alongwith his written submission the same were exhibited as Ex. PW2/C and Ex. PW2/D. The accused also submitted copies of documents including CMC New Science Delhi I-Card, matriculation mark sheet, NRDT of India Certificate, 12th mark sheet, one appreciation letter and permanent registration certificate of NRDT of India. The photocopies of the same were exhibited as Ex. P-1 to P-6. On 14.09.2012, a closure order was passed by Dr. Anil Bansal, Chairman Anti Quackery Committee to stop practicing allopathic FIR No. 199/2017 State v. Ajay Sharma Page 5 of 22 medicine and close down the clinic. The copy of the said Closure Order also sent to the concerned SHO, DCP and Health Officials. The copy of the same was exhibited as Ex. 2/E. On 18.09.2012, he filed a complaint to the SHO Patel Nagar regarding registration of FIR against the accused under section 27 of Delhi Medical Council Act, 1997. The same was exhibited as Ex. PW2/F. Thereafter, on 07.03.2014, he received a notice from the IO regarding his query on three points mentioned in the notice. The copy of the notice was exhibited as Ex. PW2/G. The reply of the same notice was given by him on 13.03.2014 to the concerned police officials. The reply was exhibited as Ex. PW2/H. On 04.05.2016, he received another notice u/s. 91 Cr.P.C. regarding the three points mentioned in the same. The notice was exhibited as Ex. PW2/1. On 18.05.2016, he filed a reply to the notice alongwith the copies of documents mentioned in the reply, same was exhibited as Ex PW2/J. PW2 was cross-examined by ld. Counsel for accused. During his cross-examination, he stated that he had not verified any documents submitted by the accused. He admitted that Ex. PW2/A does not bear his signature. He had not verified the report Ex. PW2/A. The report was given by CDMO, West, which is a Government Agency and need not be verified by him. He did not verify or enquired regarding the authenticity of documents submitted by the accused as the same was not his duty. He did not remember if Dr. Anil Bansal Chairman Any Quackery Committee send him any document. He admitted that he did not investigate the matter in between 14.09.2012 to 18.09.2012. The accused submitted the photocopies of the FIR No. 199/2017 State v. Ajay Sharma Page 6 of 22 documents when he appeared Before Delhi Medical Council on 06.07.2012. Police officials did not record his statement. He did not visit any place with the police officials in any Government Authority. He did not verify the photocopies of the documents submitted by the accused on 06.07.2012. He did not see any original documents on 06.07.2012.
5.3. Dr. Anil Bansal, Chairman Anti Quackery Committee was examined as PW3. He deposed that on 06.07.2012, the accused namely Madan Kumar Vedkar appeared before the Anti Quackery Committee, which was headed by him. The accused made representation before the Committee. Thereafter, on 14.09.2012, an order (already Ex. PW2/E) directed to Sh. Madan Kumar Vedkar to stop practicing allopathic was executed by him.
PW3 was cross-examined by ld. Counsel for accused. During his cross-examination he stated that he did not verify the document as the same is not required to be done by him and its not his duty to call for any document and to verify the same. The show cause notice was issued to the accused on the basis of the report of CDMO of Health Department, Delhi Government. He did not remember the exact date, when he issued the order directed to M.K. Vedkar to stop practicing allopathic medicine and the same is matter of record. The witness was shown the order dated 14.09.2012 and he deposed that the order was made by him on 14.09.2012 and the same was signed by him on the same day. He admitted the order Ex.PW2/E bears reference regarding File No F-
FIR No. 199/2017 State v. Ajay Sharma Page 7 of 22Antiquackery/DHS/WD/2003/4903, dated 14.12.2012 of CDMO (West District). He did not issue show cause notice to the accused as the same was not his duty. He did not visit the clinic of the accused person as he was not supposed to visit the clinic and it's the work of CDMO, Health Department Delhi Government. He did not remember any private complaint against the accused person and if there was any complaint, it's a matter of record. The office copy of the original order dated 14.09.2012 may be available with the Delhi Medical Council Office.
5.4. Doctor KK Deori, Ex-CDMO, West District, Delhi was examined as PW4. He deposed that on 11.11.2011, he was posted as CDMO, West District. On that day, he along with his team conducted a raid at MK Vedkar, Heal Care Clinic at 2116/1A-6, Gall No.7, Prem Nagar, Patel Nagar Delhi and prepared a report bearing file no. F-20 (1)/Antiqueckery/DHS/WD/2003/ 4382-83, dated 11.11.2011 which was sent to Doctor Girish Tyagi, Secretary Delhi Medical Counsel at Molana Azad Medical College, Bahadur Shah Jaffar Marg, New Delhi. He produced the copy of the same which was marked as Mark P-4A. Certified copy of the same is already Ex.PW2/A. On that day, they have not seized any medicine but prepared a list of medicines. He further stated that he along with his team members visited the clinic of accused M. K Dedhkar where he made enquiries from his team members namely Dr. Kailsh Shekhar, the then CMO (West), Ms. Kiran, the then AMM and Mr. Mahender Singh, the then Drug Inspector and prepared the report on the basis of documents and enquires. Thereafter, the FIR No. 199/2017 State v. Ajay Sharma Page 8 of 22 said report along with documents collected were sent to Shri Girish Tyagi, Secretary, Delhi Medical Council (DMC). On 14.11.2011, he collected all the remaining documents from accused and sent the same to Shri Girish Tyagi, Secretary, DMC. Certified copy of the same was exhibited as Ex.PW4/A. PW4 was cross-examined by ld. Counsel for accused. During his cross-examination, he deposed that original bearing report file No. F-20 (1)/Antiqueckery/DHS/WD/2003/4382-83 dated 11.11.2011, was sent to Secretary, DMC. He had conducted the enquiries on 04.10.2011. He had prepared the list of drugs found in the clinic of accused. The certified copy of the same was exhibited as Ex.PW4/D-1. He had also taken photographs of the medicines. The photocopy of the same was exhibited as Ex.PW-4/D-2. The photographs were taken by his team members and no photographer was called. He did not remember who had taken the said photographs. He did not remember whether any public person were present at the time of taking the photographs. He admitted that he had not prepared the enquiry report at the spot. He had sent all the abovesaid documents and photographs in original to Secretary, DMC. He further admitted that he had not seized any medicine from the clinic of accused. He did not remember whether any public person was present at the time of enquiry in the clinic of accused. He admitted that he was leading the raid. He had not verified the documents seized from the clinic of accused as he was only directed to collect the documents. He had informed regarding the raid to the local police station, however, he did not remember the date. He did not remember the FIR No. 199/2017 State v. Ajay Sharma Page 9 of 22 name of the police officials, who had accompanied them to the clinic of the accused due to lapse of considerable time. He further admitted that no entry regarding the raid was made by him in the police station. He denied that no raid was conducted at the clinic of the accused or that the accused has been falsely implicated in the present case.
5.5. Mrs Kiran Bala, ANM & Dealing Assistant in Anti Quackery Cell, Office of CDMO, West Distt, Delhi was examined as PW5. She deposed that on 4.10.2011, she alongwith Nodal Officer Dr Kailashi Shekar, Drug Inspector Mr Mahender Singh, one person from DMC/DBCP alongwith staff of local police station had gone to Health Care Clinic situated at 2116/1A6, Gali NO 7, Prem Nagar- Patel Nagar, Delhi where one person namely Madan Kumar Vedkar met them. He was found practicing Allopathic Medicines and was prescribing Allopathic Medicines to the patients. Some Allopathic were also found in the said clinic. Some photographs were also taken at the clinic. The photographs are already Ex. P2 to P5. They inquired regarding the qualifications to practice medical profession. On this accused, told that he was qualified as NBBS (Bachelor of Nature & Natural Surgery). The list of the Allopathic medicines available at the clinic was prepared by Drug Inspector Mr. Mahender Singh. The documents shown by the accused were seized by the team. They also seized the letterhead and the visiting card of the accused. The Copy of the seized documents certified by the DMC was exhibited as Ex. PW5/A (11 pages). An Inspection format was also filled by the team mentioning all the details. The FIR No. 199/2017 State v. Ajay Sharma Page 10 of 22 certified copy of the same was exhibited as Ex. PW5/B. Thereafter, final detail report of the survey drive (alongwith all documents) was prepared and forwarded to DMC for further necessary action against the accused. The certified copy of the report was exhibited as Ex. PW5/C (5 pages) mentioning the name of accused at Sr. NO. 8.
PW5 was cross-examined by ld. Counsel for accused. During her cross-examination, she has deposed that no public person was asked to join the inquiry at that time. The documents were not verified by them as the same was not part of their duty. No notice was served to the accused as the same was not required. The medicines were not seized from the clinic of the accused but the list of the same was prepared and photographs were taken. She admitted that on 11.11.11, she did not visit the clinic of accused. The report was not forwarded to DMC on 4.10.11. She further admitted that none of the documents bears her signatures. Inspection was conducted in pursuance of directions received from Directorate of Health Services dated 23.9.2011 to observe Anti Quackery Week from 3rd October to 9th October. It is correct that the survey was not conducted in pursuance of any complaint of general public. There were patients at the clinic of the accused and the patients were inquired on which they informed that accused was practicing as a doctor. They did not inquire regarding the Degree of NBBS of accused as they are only Inspection Authority. She did not receive any complaint regarding NBBS Degree. On 11.11.11, a preliminary report was submitted and on 14.12.11 the final report was submitted and the same does not bear her signatures. She denied FIR No. 199/2017 State v. Ajay Sharma Page 11 of 22 that no inspection was conducted at the clinic of the accused or that that she never visited the clinic of the accused.
5.6. Dr. Kailashi Shekhar, CMO, NFSG, CGHS, Wellness Center Sector 7, Rohini, Delhi was examined as PW6. He identified his signature on document already Mark P4/A. He further stated that the report was also signed by Dr KK Deori.
The witness was not cross examined by ld. Counsel for accused.
5.7. Sh Shambhu Dayal was examined as PW7.
He deposed that accused Madan Kumar had taken shop on rent from him which was situated in his property only. He had taken the shop on rent for an amount of Rs. 2000/- and later the rent was increased to Rs 2500/-. The accused is running a doctor business in the said shop and he is giving medicines. He used to give Ayurvedic Puriya to the patients. Once he had also taken ayurvedic medicines from the accused for cough and cold. He had not seen the accused giving Allopathic medicines to any patient in his presence. Upon being asked leading questions, he stated that accused was practicing as a Doctor and he used to give medicines to his patients.
The said witness was cross-examined by Ld. APP for State. During his cross-examination, he stated that he had visited the clinic of accused only once. He did not remember the date when he had visited the clinic of the accused. He denied that he did not remember the date as he never visited his clinic for treatment. He had not asked/seen the Medical Qualification FIR No. 199/2017 State v. Ajay Sharma Page 12 of 22 document of accused. Accused is known to him for the last about 10-15 years. He denied that he was deposing falsely as the accused is well known to him or that accused was practicing as an Allopathic Practitioner at his clinic or that that he had come at the instance of the accused or that that he was trying to save the accused from the clutches of law.
The said witness was not cross-examined by the ld. Counsel for accused.
5.8. ASI Kushal Malik was examined as PW8. He deposed that on 24.03.2014, he was posted as Head Constable at PS - Patel Nagar. On that day, he was performing duty as Duty Officer from 4:00 p.m. to 12:00 a.m. (Mid Night). At about 9:35 p.m., SHO, PS-Patel Nagar handed over him one tehrir for registration of FIR. On the basis of tehrir, he registered case FIR No. 172/2014 u/s. 419 IPC and 27 of DMC Act. Copy of FIR was exhibited as Ex.PW8/A. He also issued certificate u/s. 65 (B) of the Indian Evidence Act. Same was exhibited as Ex.PW8/B. He also made an endorsement on the rukka. Same was exhibited as Ex.PW8/C. Thereafter, he handed over the copy of FIR and original rukka to ASI Balbir.
The said witness was not cross examined by ld.
Counsel for accused.
5.9. Drugs Inspector (Retd.) Mahinder Singh was examined as PW9. He deposed that on 24.03.2014, he was directed to Anti Quackery Cell at PS - Patel Nagar. The Team consisted of Sh. K. K. Dewari and Dr. Kailash Shekhar, Chief FIR No. 199/2017 State v. Ajay Sharma Page 13 of 22 District Medical Officers, Ms. Kiran, ANM and Ct. Azad from Delhi Police. They went to the Clinic of M. K. Vedkar and found accused Dr. Madan Kumar, who is present in Court today. Chief District Medical Officers enquired with accused regarding his qualification, degree and also checked the clinic. Nothing was seized from the clinic in his presence. Thereafter, they left the clinic.
PW9 was cross-examined by ld. Counsel for accused. During his cross-examination, he stated that he did not remember the exact time when they reached at the clinic, however, it was about lunch time. He did not remember whether any other person was present in the clinic. He admitted that he did not make any enquiry from the accused. He admitted that he did not ask any public person to join investigation before entering the clinic. He did not remember whether any other police official was part of the raiding team. He admitted that he did not seize any prescription slip issued by the accused. He did not remember whether any site plan was prepared by the police. He did not visit the clinic again after 24.03.2014. He admitted that he had not received any complaint against the accused personally.
5.10. ASI Azad Singh was examined as PW10. He deposed that on 24.03.2014, he was posted as Constable at PS - Patel Nagar. On that day, IO ASI Balbir Singh had joined him in the investigation of the present case. Thereafter, they accompanied a team of Delhi Medical Council and went to one clinic at 2116/1, Gali No. 7, Prem Nagar, Delhi. Medical team had enqired the accused Madan Kumar, who was present in the FIR No. 199/2017 State v. Ajay Sharma Page 14 of 22 said clinic. He had correctly identified the accused. IO had also made enquiries from the accused. After enquiry, IO had arrested accused vide arrest memo already Ex.PW1/C and his personal search was conducted vide personal search memo already Ex.PW1/D. IO had also recorded the disclosure statement of accused vide memo Ex.PW1/E. Accused was medically examined at LHMC Hospital.
PW10 was cross-examined by ld. Counsel for accused. During his cross-examination, he stated that he did not remember whether IO had made any departure entry at PS. Raiding Team of doctors reached at PS at about 12:00 p.m. He along with IO went to the spot on his personal motorcycle. He did not remember the registration No. of motorcycle. He did not remember whether IO had asked any public person to join investigation prior to entering the clinic. No medicines were seized in his presence. IO and doctors had asked the accused to produce certain documents regarding his qualification. He did not remember whether IO had seized any document from the accused. He did not remember the exact time when they reached and left the clinic, however, they remained there for about 2 hours. He admitted that he did not enquire from the accused about the documents. He did not remember the exact time when he reached at LHMC Hospital for medical examination of the accused. He also did not remember when we reached at PS after medical examination of accused. He admitted that he did not join investigation after 24.03.2014. He did not remember whether IO had recorded statement of any public person. He denied that accused has been falsely implicated in the present case or that the FIR No. 199/2017 State v. Ajay Sharma Page 15 of 22 documents were prepared by the IO while sitting in the PS or that he never joined the investigation.
6. Upon completion of prosecution evidence, the accused was examined in accordance with Section 313 Cr.P.C. The entire incriminating evidence was put to him who denied the same and stated to be innocent and to have been wrongfully arrested. He further stated that he has been falsely implicated in the present case and that his degree is genuine and he had trained in Ayurvedic, Allopathic and Naturopathic and also have registration in the same and hence, no authority has any right to stop his Ayurvedic, Allopathic and Naturopathic practice. He further stated that genuineness of his degree was intentionally not verified. The accused opted not to lead any evidence in his defence.
7. Final arguments were heard.
8. Ld. APP for the State argued that on the basis of the entire evidence brought on record, the guilt of the accused has been established beyond reasonable doubt and accordingly, the accused be convicted. On the other hand, Ld. Counsel for the accused argued that neither any member of the raiding team nor the complainant nor the IO had verified the documents submitted by the accused which show that accused is registered medical practitioner qualified to practice allopathic medicine and hence, closure order passed by DMC is illegal. It was further argued that FIR No. 199/2017 State v. Ajay Sharma Page 16 of 22 the prosecution has failed to establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt and hence, he be acquitted.
Applicable Law, Appraisal of Evidence and Finding
9. Section 420 IPC provides penalty for Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property. It provides that:-
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 415 IPC defines Cheating. It provides that:-
Whoever, by deceiving any person, fraudulently or dishonestly induces the person so deceived to deliver any property to any person, or to consent that any person shall retain any property, or intentionally induces the person so deceived to do or omit to do anything which he would not do or omit if he were not so deceived, and which act or omission causes or is likely to cause damage or harm to that person in body, mind, reputation or property, is said to "cheat".
Explanation- A dishonest concealment of facts is a deception within the meaning of this section.FIR No. 199/2017 State v. Ajay Sharma Page 17 of 22
10. It is the case of the prosecution that accused misrepresented to the public that he is a lawful medical practitioner and dishonestly induced the public to give money in exchange of medical prescription and medicines. However, the prosecution did not examine any member of the public whom the accused might have cheated. There is no victim before the court. In absence of the same, necessary ingredients of the offence under Section 420 IPC are not established.
11. The accused is further charged for commission of offence under Section 27 DMC Act.
12. In order to establish the liability of the accused under Section 27 DMC Act, the Prosecution was required to prove that the accused was practicing modern scientific system of medicine not being a medical practitioner / practitioner as defined under Section 2 (7) of the DMC Act.
13. It is the case of prosecution that raid was conducted at Health Care Clinic at 2116/1A6, Gali no.7, Prem Nagar, Patel Nagar, Delhi where accused Madan Kumar was found practicing allopathic medicine without being registered with the Delhi Medical Council and without having necessary qualification for the same. Members of raiding team were examined by the prosecution and were also cross-examined on behalf of accused. During their cross-examination, accused attempted to create a doubt as to whether any raid was actually conducted or not.
FIR No. 199/2017 State v. Ajay Sharma Page 18 of 2214. The present case was registered upon the complaint of Dr. Girish Tyagi, Secretary Delhi Medical Council who was examined as PW2. He deposed that on 17.11.2011, he received an inspection/survey report Ex. PW2/A from CDMO, West District regarding practice of allopathic medicine by unqualified personal and at serial no. 8, name of present accused Madan Kumar Vedkar was mentioned. On the basis of this report, he issued show cause notice Ex. PW2/B to the accused namely Madan Kumar Vedkar on 27.06.2012 to appear before the Delhi Medical Council on 6th July. On 6 July, 2012, the accused appeared before the Anti Quackery Committee and admitted his practice as Allopathic Medicine and also submitted a performa alongwith his written submission (Ex. PW2/C and Ex. PW2/D). The accused also submitted copies of documents including CMC New Science Delhi I-Card, matriculation mark sheet, NRDT of India Certificate, 12th mark sheet, one appreciation letter and permanent registration certificate of NRDT of India (Ex. P-1 to P-6). On 14.09.2012, a closure order Ex. PW2/E was passed by Dr. Anil Bansal, Chairman Anti Quackery Committee to stop practicing allopathic medicine and close down the clinic. On 18.09.2012, he filed a complaint Ex. PW2/F to the SHO Patel Nagar regarding registration of FIR against the accused under section 27 of Delhi Medical Council Act, 1997. Thereafter, on 07.03.2014, he received a notice from the IO Ex. PW2/G regarding his query on three points mentioned in the notice. The reply of the same notice Ex. PW2/H was given by him on 13.03.2014 to the concerned police officials. On 04.05.2016, he received another notice u/s. 91 Cr.P.C. Ex. PW2/I regarding the FIR No. 199/2017 State v. Ajay Sharma Page 19 of 22 three points mentioned in the same. On 18.05.2016, he filed a reply Ex. PW2/J to the notice alongwith the copies of documents mentioned in the reply.
15. Complainant was duly cross-examined by Ld. Counsel for accused. During his cross-examination, no questions were asked pertaining to documents Ex. PW2/B to Ex. PW2/J relied upon by him. Hence, the accused had not disputed the said documents. Ex. PW2/B is show cause notice and Ex. PW2/C and Ex. PW2/D is reply to said show cause notice wherein accused had stated to be practicing allopathic medicine and that he is not registered with Delhi Medical Council. Even during his examination under Section 313 Cr.P.C., accused had stated to be practicing aryurvedic, allopathic and naturopathic medicine.
16. Hence, the fact that accused was practicing allopathic medicine is established. Since the fact that accused was practicing allopathic medicine is not denied, lapses on part of raiding team become immaterial as the purpose of the raid was to ascertain whether the accused was practicing allopathic medicine at his clinic or not. Further, the fact that accused was not registered with Delhi Medical Council is also established.
17. The accused claims that he is registered with NRDT of India and having necessary qualification to practice allopathic medicine. It is further alleged that all the witnesses beit members of raiding team or the complainant or official issuing closure order or the IO of the present case have deposed that FIR No. 199/2017 State v. Ajay Sharma Page 20 of 22 qualification documents of the accused were not verified and hence, any closure order without verifying those documents is illegal and also present case is not maintainable.
18. From the closure order Ex. PW2/E, it is apparent that the same was passed as the accused was not holding requisite medical qualifications as enumerated in Schedules I, II, III of Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 entitling him to practice allopathy and he is also not registered with the Delhi Medical Council.
19. Hence, the closure order and the present case is not on the basis that the qualification documents submitted by accused were fake or forged but rather the qualifications as possessed by the accused do not entitle him to practice allopathic medicine. It is not the case of the prosecution that accused does not possess the qualification as claimed by him rather the case of the prosecution is that qualifications as possessed by the accused do not entitle him to practice allopathic medicine as the said qualifications do not fall in Schedules I, II, III of Indian Medical Council Act, 1956.
20. In such circumstances, the onus was on the accused to show that his registration with NRDT of India entitles him to practice allopathic medicine. However, no document in support of the same was produced. Further, again it was for the accused that the qualifications as possessed by him entitle him to practice FIR No. 199/2017 State v. Ajay Sharma Page 21 of 22 allopathic medicine. However, no document in support of the same was produced by him.
21. In view of the above, it is concluded that prosecution has been able to establish the ingredients of the offence under Section 27 DMC Act beyond reasonable doubts however, ingredients of offence under Section 420 IPC are not made out.
22. Accordingly, the accused is convicted of the offence under Section 27 DMC Act and is acquitted of the offence under Section 420 IPC.
23. Copy of this judgment be given, free of cost, to the convict.
24. As per directions contained in judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Karan v. State of NCT of Delhi (2020), convict is directed to file affidavit of their income and assets in prescribed format (Annexure-A) within ten days.
Announced in open court Digitally signed
on this 19th day of March, 2024 UPASANA by UPASANA
SATIJA
SATIJA Date: 2024.03.19
16:21:46 +0530
(UPASANA SATIJA)
ACMM, WEST/THC/DELHI/m
FIR No. 199/2017 State v. Ajay Sharma Page 22 of 22