Impersonation and Forgery Not Merely Allegations but Require Effective Investigation: Delhi High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail to Unani Practitioner

The High Court of Delhi, presided by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Navin Chawla, dismissed the anticipatory bail application of Dr. Tabassum Saifi, a practitioner of Unani medicine, in a case involving allegations of medical impersonation and forgery.

Legal Point: The Court delved into the application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. for anticipatory bail in FIR No.191/2023, which encompassed offences under Sections 419, 420, 468, and 471 of the IPC. The primary accusation was the impersonation of an MBBS doctor and the usage of forged credentials in medical practice.

The FIR was lodged following the death of a patient post-childbirth at Medicare Hospital, run by the applicant. The prosecution alleged that Dr. Saifi, holding a BUMS degree, impersonated an MBBS doctor using a forged stamp and unauthorisedly prescribed modern medicines.

Credentials of Dr. Saifi: The Court noted the applicant's qualifications in Unani Medicine and the arguments that BUMS doctors are authorised for conducting normal deliveries as per government guidelines. However, the issue was the alleged impersonation and usage of a forged stamp.

Allegations of Impersonation and Forgery: The prosecution contended that Dr. Saifi used a forged stamp of an MBBS doctor and falsely represented herself, an act not supported by her qualifications.

Considerations for Anticipatory Bail: The Court balanced personal liberty against the need for effective investigation, citing precedents like Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia and others. The gravity of the charges and the peculiar facts demanded thorough inquiry.

Decision: The Court dismissed the anticipatory bail application, emphasizing the need for custodial interrogation to verify claims and gather material evidence.

Date of Decision: 28th March 2024

TABASSUM SAIFI VERSUS STATE OF NCT OF DELHI