PRAVEEN GARG Vs. MEDICAL COUNCIL OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner-Dr. Praveen Garg has challenged in this writ petition letter dated 10th October, 2003 written by Medical Council of India informing him that he has been found "prima facie guilty of infamous conduct in respect of medical profession". Accordingly, the Medical council of India has decided to remove his name temporarily from registration of the Indian Medical Register for a period of three months with effect from 13th October, 2003. The said letter reads:-"sir/madam, the General Body of the Council at its meeting held on 20th and 21st Nov. , 2002 after taking note that upon information and evidence given by complainant Sh. Vikram Raheja, C/o smt. Meena Raheja, 123-R. , Model Town, Karnal have noted that Dr. Praveen Garg has committed negligence in the treatment/management of the patient namely Sandeep Kumar Raheja. Hence, he has been found prima-facie guilty of infamous conduct in respect of medical profession. In light of the above facts, it has been decided by the Council to remove his name temporarily against Regn. No. MCI-5577, dated 21. 4. 1986, from the Indian Medical Register for a period of three months w. e. f. 13. 10. 2003. "

(2.) THE letter itself states that Medical Council of India had formed a prima facie opinion and not a final conclusion or decision before imposing punishment, suspending or removing the petitioner's name from the register for a period of three months.

(3.) MEDICAL Council of India is duty bound and under an obligation to take action against doctors, who are guilty of misconduct. However, no punishment or finding of misconduct is established by a mere prima facie finding. Conclusion duly supported and fortified by sound reasons is required before a doctor is held to be guilty of misconduct. Prima facie opinion does not justify imposing punishment of suspension. It can only justify further enquiry and investigation. Punishment is to be imposed after reaching the conclusion that the concerned doctor was guilty of negligence or misconduct. Finding of misconduct or professional misconduct is an emotive issue and has serious implications and tarnishes image and casts aspersions on professional skill of a doctor. Misconduct should entail punishment and is required to be uncovered but not in this manner. The Supreme Court in the case of Martin F. D'souza versus mohd. Ishfaq, reported in (2009) 3 SCC 1 observed:-"35. Before dealing with these principles two things have to be kept in mind : (2) A balance has to be struck in such cases. While doctors who cause death or agony due to medical negligence should certainly be penalized, it must also be remembered that like all professionals doctors too can make errors of judgment but if they are punished for this no doctor can practice his vocation with equanimity. Indiscriminate proceedings and decisions against doctors are counter productive and serve society no good. They inhibit the free exercise of judgment by a professional in a particular situation. "