Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2009 DIGILAW 91 (MP)

Gordhan v. State of M. P.

2009-01-20

S.S.DWIVEDI

body2009
ORDER 1. The applicant has filed this petition under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code for quashment of the charge sheet filed against the applicant before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Jaora registered as Criminal Case No. 1414/06 for the offence punishable under section 24 of The Madhya Pradesh Ayurvigyan Parishad Adhiniyam, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). 2. Brief facts of the case are that the Medical Officer posted at Primary Health Centre, Piplouda lodged the FIR on 19.3.2006 at Police Station Piplouda that the applicant-accused being the registered Medical practitioner in Ayurvedic Medicine and Surgery is having allopathic medicine in his Clinic also for which he has not been legally authorised. The allopathic injection, were found in the Clinic belonged to the applicant. On this information, the police had registered a case under section 420 of the IPC and under section 24 of the Act and after due investigation the charge sheet has been filed. 3. The learned trial Court after hearing both the parties came to the conclusion that prima facie charge under section 24 of the Act of 1987 is made out against the applicant and had framed the charge against the applicant. Aggrieved by which the applicant has preferred Criminal Revision No. 66/2007 before the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Jaora. The learned Revisional Court by order dated 23.7.2007 dismissed the revision aggrieved by which the applicant came up before this Court by this petition under section 482 of the CrPC. 4. Having heard the learned counsel for the applicant as well as the Dy. Government Advocate for the State and perused the record. 5. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the Chief Medical Officer, Ratlam by a letter dated 14.6.2006 informed the police officer of Police Station, Piplouda that a person having the degree of bachelor of Ayurved with Modern Medicine & Surgery and registered as a medical practitioner then he is authorised under section 24 of the Act to use the allopathic medicine also for which Govt. of M.P. has also authorised such medical practitioner for the use of allopathic medicine. of M.P. has also authorised such medical practitioner for the use of allopathic medicine. In view of the aforesaid information given by the Chief Medical Officer, Ratlam to the police concerned, the concerning charge as framed by the trial Court has automatically come to an end and the learned trial Court as well as the Revisional Court has ignored the aforesaid information given by the Chief Medical Officer. It is also submitted by the counsel for the applicant that the State of M.P. has also issued the notification under the Drugs and Cosmetic Act, 1940 on 19th June, 2003 wherein authorised all the registered medical practitioner who are having the degree of Ayurvedic Medicine and Surgery to use the allopathic medicine, and the copy of the notification Annexure P-8 is also submitted by the counsel for the applicant with this petition for perusal and in view of the aforesaid notification also the possession of allopathic medicine which was found in the clinic of the applicant does not come within the purview of section 24 of the Act concerned and both the Courts below have wrongly come to the conclusion, a prima-facie charge under section 24 of the Act is made out against the applicant, therefore, prayed for setting aside of the impugned order and for quashment of the charge sheet filed against the applicant. 6. The learned Dy. Govt. Advocate for the State supported the impugned order passed by the trial Court and submits that all these documents filed by the applicant may be considered by the trial Court at the time of trial and at this stage the concerning charge is not held to be without any substance, therefore, no grounds are available for the quashment of the proceeding concerned, hence prayed for dismissal of the petition. 7. On perusal of the documentary evidence produced by the applicant it is apparent that admittedly the applicant is having a valid degree of bachelor of Ayurvedic Medicine and Surgery issued by the Vikram University, Ujjain wherein all the necessary subject of surgery and medicines are mentioned as the subject of the concerning degree. The applicant has also filed a certificate issued by the Chief Medical Officer, Ujjain for the completion of period of internship of the applicant in various department of District Hospital, Ujjain. The applicant has also filed a certificate issued by the Chief Medical Officer, Ujjain for the completion of period of internship of the applicant in various department of District Hospital, Ujjain. The applicant has also filed Annexure P-7, the registration certificate issued by the competent authority ·of the State of M.P. by which the applicant is authorised for the medical practice in Ayurvedic and Unani procedure. The Annexure P-8 is the Gazette notification issued by the Govt. of M.P. whereby the Govt. of M.P. has authorised all the medical practitioners having BAMS degree; to use the allopathic medicines also to the extent that they get the necessary training during their BAMS course. 8. Thus, on perusal of the aforesaid documents specially Annexure P-8 the copy of the Govt. Gazette for which the judicial notice can be taken without any formal proof. It is apparent that the applicant being the medical practitioner of Ayurvedic and Unani procedure is legally authorised to use the allopathic medicines, also is not held to be liable for illegal possession of allopathic medicines in contravention of the any of the section of the Act concerned. Therefore, the submission made by the counsel for the applicant appears to be just and proper that prima facie for having the possession some allopathic medicine by the applicant, he cannot be held guilty for any contravention of the provision of the section 24 of the Act concerned. 9. The learned Govt. Advocate is not able to produce any contrary view agains,t the publication of the gazette by the State of M.P. dated 19th June, 2003 whereby a medical practitioner having BAMS degree cannot use the allopathic medicine during the treatment of the patients. 10. In view of the aforesaid discussion, prima facie charge under section 24 of the Act is not made out against the applicant and therefore, the charge sheet filed by the State against the applicant is liable to be quashed and no fruitful purpose will be served by continuing the aforesaid charge sheet against the applicant. It will also cause the 'miscarriage of justice. 11. Resultantly, the petition filed by the applicant is allowed. The charge sheet filed by the State against the applicant for the offence under section 24 of the Act is hereby quahsed. A copy of this order be sent to the trial Court with the original record. Petition is disposed of accordingly.