Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

21) Insofar as Mr. Singhdev and Mr. Khattar are concerned, they relied upon the orders passed by the respective bodies, whom, they represented i.e. MCI and DMC respectively.

21.1) Therefore, while Mr. Singhdev refuted the assertions made on behalf of Mr. Rai, Mr. Khattar substantially supported the stand taken on behalf of Mr. Rai, on merits. Insofar as the enhancement of punishment qua Dr. Kakran is concerned, he chose to rely upon the conclusion reached by DMC.

Analysis and Reasons:

26) Therefore, for the foregoing reasons, I am unable to persuade myself that the decision of the MCI, insofar as Dr. Maichand was concerned, was correct. The MCI has, in fact, glossed over the findings of fact, recorded by the DMC, in its order. Thus, I am inclined to set aside MCI‟s order dated 23.08.2017, insofar as Dr. Maichand is concerned.

27) As regards Dr. Kakran, the only grievance of Mr. Rai is with regard to the punishment accorded to him. In this context, I had asked Mr. Singhdev, who made submissions on behalf of the MCI, as to whether any policy had been formulated by the MCI, with regard to punishments to be accorded to delinquent doctors for infractions committed by them.

28) Mr. Singhdev informed me that no such policy had been formulated. In my opinion, this aspect needs to be looked at, urgently, by MCI. MCI must have a sentencing policy in place for guidance of its Committees which are tasked with job of returning recommendations both, on the guilt and punishment to be accorded to a delinquent doctor. The sentencing guidelines should take into account the aggravating and mitigating circumstances, including but not limited to whether or not the delinquent doctor is a first time offender or a repeat offender. MCI, is directed to report on this aspect of the matter within the next three months.