Bombay High Court
Sanjay S/O. Shantaram Mahale vs The State Of Maharashtra on 27 January, 2020
Bench: T.V. Nalawade, M. G. Sewlikar
1 Cri. Appln. No. 2314-2018.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2314 OF 2018
Sanjay Shantaram Mahale,
Age : 42 Years, Occ. Electro Homeopathy
R/o. Rajaram patil Nagar, Nakane Road
Deopur, Dhule Tq. & Dist. Dhule. ... APPLICANT
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra,
Through P.S.I. Dhule City Police Station,
Dhule Dist. Dhule
2. Dr. Mahesh Madhavrao More,
Age : 44 Years, Occ. Medical Ofcer,
R/o. 31 Krushna Kamal Society,
Golibar Tekadi Dhule, Dist. Dhule ..RESPONDENTS
....
Advocate for the Applicant : Mr. P. B. Patil
A.P.P for Respondents-State : Mr. R.D. Sanap
Advocate for respondent No.2 : Mr. A.S.Sawant
.....
CORAM :T.V. NALAWADE AND
M. G. SEWLIKAR,JJ.
DATE : 27.01.2020.
ORDER :-
The application is fled for relief of quashing of FIR No. 164 of 2018 registered with Dhule City Police Station for the ofences punishable under Sections 419, 420, 465 of the Indian Penal Code, and under Section 33(2) of the Maharashtra Medical Practitioners Act, 1961 and section 4 of Drugs And Medicine Act.
::: Uploaded on - 30/01/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 11/06/2020 21:03:29 ::: 2 Cri. Appln. No. 2314-2018.odt
2. Both the sides are heard.
3. The crime is registered on the basis of report given by a Medical Ofcer of Dhule local body Hospital on 19.07.2018. The State Government has given directions to the medical ofcers to trace out quack doctors and take action against them and accordingly one committee is constituted by the State Government. On 18.07.2018, on the basis of specifc information which the Commissioner of the local body was having against the present applicant Sanjay Mahale, action was directed. The informant and other medical ofcers constituted team and they raided the clinic of the applicant which was run under name and style as ''Sai Samarath Clinic'' at Sakri road Dhule. Help of police was also taken for raiding the premises. They noticed that on the front portion of the premises the educational qualifcation of the applicant was written as M.D.(A.M.), C.G.O. Pathalogy Lab, Infertility Test and treatment. He had described himself as a Doctor. Present petitioner was present in the premises. On enquiry he gave his name. The purpose of the raid was told to him and he was asked to produce the record in respect of his qualifcation. He produced some record like certifcate of Diploma in Naturopathy & Yoga Medicine System, Bachelor of alternative system of medicine, Bachelor of Electropathy Medicine ::: Uploaded on - 30/01/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 11/06/2020 21:03:29 ::: 3 Cri. Appln. No. 2314-2018.odt Systems and Sergery (B.E.M.S.), Bachelor of Alternative System of Medicines (B.A.M.S.) Master of Doctor in Alternative Medicine System (M.D.A.M.) D.M.L.T. certifcate, Electrohomeopathy,
4. After going through the aforesaid record the committee formed opinion that he was not entitled to mention that he was a doctor and he was not having the record like registration of Maharashtra Vaidyak Parishad, Maharashtra Samchiktisa Parishad, Maharashtra Bhartiya chiktsa Parishad and Maharashtra Danta Vidyak Parishad, Thus, he has not registered himself under registration of The Maharashtra Medical Practitioners Act, 1961 (Section 31 and 1).
5. On the search of the aforesaid shop premises the committee recovered Alopathy medicines and disposable syringe. They also recovered other articles which included Ayurvedic medicines. The medicines contained many Allopathy medicines and syringes. The articles like pairs of glows, disposable syringe etc. also showed that he was practicing in Alopathy medicine.
::: Uploaded on - 30/01/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 11/06/2020 21:03:29 ::: 4 Cri. Appln. No. 2314-2018.odt
6. Learned A.P.P drew the attention of this Court to the directions given by the State Government in the communication dated 22.01.2018. It shows that the persons having certifcate etc of the Electro homeopathy or Electro pathy can practice in those felds but they are not entitled to use the words like doctor , Vaidya, Hakim and they cannot give medicine of other felds like Allopathy.
7. The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicnt is having certifcate in respect of Naturopathy also and so he can call himself as doctor. Some record is produced to show that he obtained some certifcates of Naturopathy. Though that kind of record is there, the aforesaid contents of the FIR and police statements of the witnesses show that he was practicing in other felds and there was nothing in the aforesaid premises to show that he was practicing in Naturopathy. Some Ayurvedic Medicines were there of diferent companies but on that basis it cannot be said that he was practicing in Naturpaothy. A certifcate issued by Rural Health Service Society, Mumbai is produced but it shows that he was allowed to practice as Primary Health Care, Social Worker under the Rules of that society. Whether that society is recognized or not recognized is again question which needs ::: Uploaded on - 30/01/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 11/06/2020 21:03:29 ::: 5 Cri. Appln. No. 2314-2018.odt to be decided by the Court. Some certifcates like BAMS etc are there, but those certifcates are of Bachelar of Alternative System of Medicines. The trial Court will have to consider all these record but apparently the applicant was practicing in Allopathy and educational qualifcations mentioned by him were certainly misleading.
8. The learned counsel for the applicant placed reliance on some observations made by the learned Single Judge of this Court in (Criminal Application No. 176 of 2012 ) ( Harichand @ Harishchandra Ananta Roy Vs. The state of Maharashtra decided at this Bench on 11.04.2012, in the case reported as (State of Maharashtra Vs. Paulin P. Picardo (Mrs.) 1990(2) Bom.C.R. 668, and the Division Bench case (Criminal Writ Petition No. 385 of 2006 ) (Sahebrao Gaikwad Vs.The State of Maharashtra and another) decided on 28.11.2006 by this Bench. The last case is of Naturopathy. In the second case, it is made clear even the learned single of this Court held that when licence or certifcate, even degree is obtained by the persons in particular system of medicine he must practice only in that system. On the basis of facts and circumstances this Court holds that by making false representation quack doctors are ::: Uploaded on - 30/01/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 11/06/2020 21:03:29 ::: 6 Cri. Appln. No. 2314-2018.odt cheating the persons of the society and in many cases due to such quack doctors the patients do not get proper treatment and in many cases they die due to improper treatment. Such cases cannot be taken lightly. This Court holds that no relief can be given to the applicant. In the result, the application stands dismissed.
(M.G.SEWLIKAR, J.) (T.V. NALAWADE, J.)
YSK/
::: Uploaded on - 30/01/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 11/06/2020 21:03:29 :::