Smt. Arti Sahu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 9 December, 2022

[Cites 8, Cited by 0]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Smt. Arti Sahu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 9 December, 2022

Bench: Vishal Dhagat

                                   1
       IN    THE  HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                         AT JABALPUR
                            BEFORE
              HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL DHAGAT
                   ON THE 9 th OF DECEMBER, 2022
               MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 58019 of 2022

BETWEEN:-
SMT. ARTI SAHU W/O SHRI NEERAJ GUPTA, AGED
ABOUT    32  YEARS, OCCUPATION: JOB VILLAGE
SHOBHAPUR TEHSIL SOHAGPUR NARMADAPURAM
M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                .....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI MOHAMMAD ALI, ADVOCATE )

AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH POLICE
STATION SOHAGPUR DISTRICT NARMADAPURAM M.P.
(MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                             .....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI K. S. BAGHEL, GOVT. ADVOCATE)

      This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
following:
                                    ORDER

This is the first bail applications filed on behalf of the applicant/accused under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail, as she is under apprehension of her arrest, in connection with Crime No.454/2022, registered at Police Station Sohagpur, District Narmadapuram (M.P.) for the offences punishable under Sections420, 467, 468, 471 and 34 of Indian Penal Code, Section 8 of M.P. Upcharya Grih Tatha Rajopcharya Sambandhi Sthapnaein (Panjikran Tatha Anugyapam) Adhiniyam, 1973 Sanshodhan Adhiniyam 2008 and Section 24 of M.P. Ayurvigyan Parishad Adhiniyam.

Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submitted that respondents had carried inspection of hospital when same was closed. It was mentioned in their inspection report that dust and other filthiness were found in the hospital. It is submitted that period of license for opening the hospital has expired and application has been made by the hospital for renewal of same. Since application for renewal was pending, therefore, hospital was in closed condition and applicant cannot be held liable for offences registered against her. It is submitted that applicant is having Medical Store in hospital. Applicant is having license and eligibility for opening the Medical Store. Hospital has applied for renewal after 24.3.2022 which was not considered and was pending before the authorities. It is submitted that no offence under section 420, 467, 468 and 471 of IPC has been committed by the applicant. So far as allegation against applicant under section 8 of Adhiniyam of 1973 and Section 24 of M.P. Ayurvigyan Parishad Adhiniyam is concerned, applicant has not committed any crime. It is for the hospital management to see how the hospital is to be run after 24.3.2022 and applicant is not responsible for the same. In these circumstances, it is prayed that applicant be released on anticipatory bail.

Learned Govt. Advocate appearing for the State opposed the application for grant of bail and submitted that applicant represented herself to be doctor and had admitted patients in hospital. Applicant was also getting facility of Ayushman Card from State Government. Qualified doctor was not found in hospital and hospital was found in poor shape and condition. It is submitted that applicant will be required for investigation and in view of aforesaid circumstances, anticipatory bail application be dismissed.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

As per prosecution case hospital was run by Praveen Kanojia, Neeraj 3 Kumar Gupta, Smt. Arti Gupta, Dr. Neeraj Sethi and one Roshan. There was no registration of hospital and no MBBS doctor was found in hospital during inspection. Hospital was admitting patients without registration and was advertising to give benefit of Ayushman Bharat Yojna in hospital. List of specialist doctors was also published but no specialized doctors were found in hospital. Applicant Arti Gupta was not having any degree or diploma in Medicine then also she was using the word 'doctor' in her I'd card and wearing the same to portray herself as doctor. Applicant is wife of Director of Tejaswani Hospital namely, Neeraj Kumar Gupta. As per case diary, applicant portraying herself to be a doctor was admitting patients in hospital which was treated by unqualified persons. Applicant alongwith other co-accused persons did not close the hospital and continued to earn profit even after lapse of their registration.

District Health Officer has passed an order to close the hospital but still the hospital was found open and applicant was also present in the hospital. 16 registers, 28 files of patients and I'd card of accused Arti Gupta and Director Neeraj Kumar Gupta were seized. One patient suffering from paralysis was found admitted in hospital and he had deposited Rs.15,000/- for medical treatment though no doctor was present in hospital. Mukesh Patel has given statement that he is taking treatment in hospital and applicant Arti Gupta had guaranteed him that he will get well and he had deposited Rs.15,000/- and no receipt has also been given.

Considering the evidence which is available in the case diary, at this stage, it cannot be said that applicant Arti Gupta is not involved in any way in the hospital. Investigation is in progress and applicant may be required for 4 further investigation of the case.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, anticipatory bail application filed by the applicant is dismissed.

(VISHAL DHAGAT) JUDGE mms Digitally signed by MONSI M SIMON Date: 2022.12.12 11:34:28 +05'30'

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Madhya Pradesh High Court