EH IN COURT OF PANJAB You Have Queried For Part Case No - 34949-1999 CLICK HERE TO GO BACK Case Number Petitioner Name Respondent Name Advocate Case Status CRM-34949-M-1999 PARAMJIT SINGH. PB STATE. R.S. BAINS, AGPB. CLICK HERE TO GO BACK CWP-16791-2000 ELECTROHOMOEPATHIC DOCTOR ASSC STATE OF PUNJAB VEENA KUMARI Disposed - 04/03/2002 PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT Before:-satish kumar mittal , J Criminal .m. no:-34949- M of 1999(o&m)D/d.22/7/2004 Dr.paramjit singh :-petitioners versus state of punjab and others:-respondent for the petitioners:-Mr. r.s Bains for respondent :-Mr. ashish verma ,AAG ,Punjab Drug & cosmetic act, section 26, Indian medical council Act ,1956-section-15, F.I.R registered. Accused doing practice as electrohomeopathy and possessed necessary qualification registration certificate under Indian medical council act not required accused not practicing in modern sysytem of medicine criminal proceeding against the accused for not getting ragistration certificate under Indian medical council act [para 7] quashed. Case referred: Electro-homeopathic doctor’s association ,Punjab V state of Punjab state , civil wright petition no:16791 of 2000 decised on march 04,2002 JUDGMENT SATISH KUMAR MITTAL ,j : the petisioner ,who is practicing in electro-homeopathy system of medicine ,has filled this petition for quashing F.I.R NO: 98 dated 7.8.1999 ragistered against him at police station BALACHAUR under section 15 of the Indian medical council act,1956 and section 26 of the drugs and cosmetic act. (2) the aforesaid FIR was registered against 59 persons ,including the petitioner,on the basis of a letter wrighten by cicil surgeon ,Nawanshahr ,alleging that in the view of the circular dated 29.7.1999,issued by the govt. on the basis of the direction given by this court on 13.10.1995 in civil wright petition no:1656 of 1997,cheking of unragisred medical practitioners was made in the distric and was found that 59 persons were doing medical practice in allopathy without any recognized medical qualification and without getting them registered. (3) the case of the petitioners is that he has done the course of electro-homeopathic system of medicine ,has passed three years degree course of B.E.M.S in the month of april ,1998 and he is practicing electro-homeopathy system of medicin and got himself regisred as electro-homeopathic with national electro-homeopathic board of India on,7.7.1999. A copy of the ragistration certificate issued by the board has been attached here with as annexure ,p:1. it is his further case that he is not practicing in Allopathy system of medicine s at all nor it is case of the prosecution. Therefore without there being any material that the petitioner is practicing in allopathy system of medicine ,the aforesaid fir was registered against them. (4) counsel for the petitioner submits that in the civil wright petion no: 16791 of 2000,titled as electro-homeopathic doctor’s association ,Punjab V state of Punjab and others ,decided on march 04,2002 it was held by a Division bench of this court that the circular issued by the Punjab goct. In view of the direction given by this court in civil wright petition no : 1669 of 1997 was not pertaing to the person practicing in electro-homeopathy system of medicine . Theat circular was issued only for restain unregistered practicioners practicing modern of medicine ,who deal in allopathic medicine. The division bench of this court in this regard observed as under: - We would have discussed the issue raised by the petitioner in the detail but the necessaity of doing so has been obivited because at the hearing learned Deputy advocate general stated that as per the impugned instruction action is required to be taken against those person who are practicing in the morden system of medicine despite the fact that they do not hold the requiste qualificaton and registration under provisions of the medical council act,1956, or other corresponding provisions and the member of the petitioner associate ,(association?) are not be affected by the impugned circular. She further stated that she would advise the department to issue necessary instruction in this respect to civil surgeon and police authorities. (5) In the view of the aforesaid petiton ,learned council for the petitioner argued that since petitioner is not practicing in modern system of medicine and the impugned fir was loged against him merely on the ground that he is not a Registered medical practioner. (6) on 9.2.2004 ,the court diredted the investigating agency to verify the fact as to whether the petitioner practicing modern medicine system of medicine or not?. In compliance therefore Deputy. Suprintendent of police BALACHAUR ,fieled an affidavit ,stating that during the coure of investigation ,the petitioner was nighter found in possession of any allopathic drugs not practicing in modern system of medicine. He further stated the during the course of cheking of clinical premises of the petitioner by the doctor concerned ,no allopathic medicine was recovered nor he had taken any record of the petitioner in custody showing that he was practicing in modern system of medicines. (7)in the view of th aforesaid affidavit ,registration of fir against the petitioner under section 15 of the Indian medical council act,1956 and section 26 of the drug and cosmetic act was an abuse of process of the court as the same was registered only on the ground that the petitioner was not possessing the ragistration certificate under Indian medical council act,1956 or other corresponding provision act. When the petitioner was not practicing in modern system of medicine ,he was not required to get himself registered under the said act. Undisputedly ,the practioner was practicing in electro-homeopathic system of medicine and was registered with national electro-homeopathy board of India.. therefore he was competent to practice in electro-homeopathy system of medicine . (8)in the view of the aforesaid discussion ,the instant petition is allowed and the impuged FIR no:89 of dated:7.8.1999 registered at police station balachaur under section 15 of the Indian medical council act,1956 & section 26 of the drug and cosmetic act and the consequent proceeding ,qua the petitioner only, are quashed. Petiton allowed.
- homepage
- courses
- news
- adress
- dr.ramesh parmar
- electropathy by dhs
- join electropathy
- contact detail
- legal status of electropathy
- ministry of social justice
- board
- life story of dr.mattei
- directorate of health servicie
- parlament of india
- news
- mews 2
- electropathy in j&k
- gujrat high court
- karnataka
- eh in punjab court