Recovery Of Excess Payment Made By Mistake Is Permissible When Employee Furnished An Undertaking To Refund: Supreme Court Anticipatory Bail Application Under Sec 482 BNSS Is Maintainable Even If No Formal Order Of Arrest Is Passed By CGST Authorities: Allahabad High Court Consensual Physical Relationship Following Three-Year Courtship Does Not Amount To Rape If Marriage Promise Fails: Supreme Court Criminalization Of Civil Disputes | Courts Must Not Engage In Speculative Reasoning While Dealing With Quashing Petitions Under Section 482 CrPC: Supreme Court Mere Recovery Of Tainted Money In The Absence Of Proof Of Demand Is Insufficient To Sustain Conviction Under Section 7 And 13 PC Act: Supreme Court High Court Cannot Quash NDPS Proceedings Merely Relying On Jurisprudence Regarding Evidentiary Value Of Confessional Statements: Supreme Court Extra-Judicial Confession Made While In Police Custody Is Inadmissible In Evidence: Supreme Court Taxing Authorities Must Levy Tax Based On The Form Of Goods At The Time Of Sale, Not On Potential End Use: Supreme Court Punjab & Haryana High Court Orders CBI Probe Into State Corruption Scams After Punjab Police Fails To Act On ED’s Section 66(2) PMLA Referral Section 482 CrPC | FIR Based On Consensual Relationship Gone Sour Cannot Be Sustained To Coerce Marriage: Supreme Court CISF Personnel Soliciting Bribes For Employment Is Guilty Of 'Gross Misconduct' Under Section 18 CISF Act: Andhra Pradesh High Court PIL | State Cannot Use Demolition Powers To Silence Whistleblowers Or Deflect Accountability: Punjab & Haryana High Court Criminal Proceedings Against In-Laws Without Specific Allegations Of Overt Acts Constitute Abuse Of Process: Supreme Court Order 22 Rule 9 CPC | Admission In An Abated Suit Does Not Constitute Estoppel Against Landlord In A Fresh Eviction Proceeding: Calcutta High Court Arbitral Award Cannot Be Set Aside For Non-Adjudication Of Claims Specifically Abandoned By Parties: Delhi High Court Mere Long Possession Is Not Adverse Possession; Defendant Must Prove Hostile Animus To Deny Title Of True Owner: Himachal Pradesh High Court Reopening Of Assessment Under Sec 148A(d) Income Tax Act Cannot Be Based On 'Change Of Opinion' Without Fresh Tangible Material: Gujarat High Court Municipal Authorities Must Initiate Formal Proceedings And Grant Opportunity Of Hearing Before Sealing Premises:  Jharkhand High Court Court Cannot Compel Third-Party To Undergo DNA Test Unless Necessary For Just Adjudication: Madhya Pradesh High Court Trial Court Cannot Defer Bail Application Merely Because A Transfer Petition Is Pending In High Court: Punjab & Haryana High Court Section 108 BNS | Mere Taunts Or Harassment Regarding Not Bearing A Male Child Do Not Constitute Abetment To Suicide: Rajasthan High Court Daily-Wage Employees Treated As Permanent Under 1988 Government Resolution Entitled To Annual Increment Benefits: Supreme Court

Medical Ethics Ruling: Court Upholds Authority to Impose Penalties Beyond Removal from Medical Council Rolls: Delhi High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling on medical ethics, the High Court of Delhi, on October 19, 2023, upheld the authority of the Medical Council to impose penalties on doctors beyond the removal of their names from the Medical Council rolls. The judgment came in response to a petition challenging a warning issued by the Medical Council of India to two doctors.

The court, in its observation, noted, “It cannot be said that for the misconduct prescribed in Regulation 7.7 of the Indian Medical Council (Professional Conduct, Etiquette and Ethics) Regulations, 2002, the only penalty that can be levied is one of removal from the rolls.” This ruling clarifies that the Medical Council possesses the discretion to impose a range of penalties on doctors found guilty of professional misconduct.

The case involved a complaint against Dr. Arti Lalchandani and Dr. Ravi Kumar for issuing a certificate without conducting a patient examination. The UP State Medical Council had initially warned the doctors not to issue such certificates without examination, a decision challenged by the complainant before the Medical Council of India.

The court’s decision also cited relevant legal precedents, including the interpretation of the term “liable” in statutes. It emphasized that the word “liable” does not convey an absolute obligation but rather a possibility of attracting liability.

This ruling reaffirms the Medical Council’s authority to take disciplinary actions against doctors who breach professional conduct standards, including but not limited to removal from the Medical Council rolls. The court’s judgment sets an important precedent in the realm of medical ethics and professional accountability.

Date of Decision: 19 October 2023

NEENA RAIZADA    vs MEDICAL COUNCIL OF INDIA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY & ORS.

[gview file="https://lawyerenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/19_Oct_2023_Dr_Neena_Vs_Medical_Council.pdf"]

Latest Legal News