Medical Practitioner's License Suspension in Contempt Proceedings Deemed Invalid: Supreme Court

In a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court of India has declared the suspension of a medical practitioner's license in contempt proceedings as invalid. The judgment, delivered by Justices B.R. Gavai and Sanjay Karol on 28th July 2023, raised crucial questions about the nature of punishments specified under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

The case, arising from unauthorized construction carried out by the appellant, Gostho Behari Das, came before the High Court of Calcutta (Circuit Bench at Jalpaiguri) in MAT No. 67 of 2022. The court, in contempt proceedings (WPCRC9 of 2022), suspended the medical practitioner's license, leading to the appeal in the Supreme Court.

The critical issue before the apex court was whether the punishment of suspending the medical practitioner's license was compatible with the penalties outlined in the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. Justice Sanjay Karol, in his judgment, observed, "The punishment handed down to the contemnor is entirely foreign to the Act and, therefore, unsustainable." The Court emphasized the need for judicious and sparing use of the power of contempt and protection of free speech in its judgment.

The Court clarified that while a medical practitioner might face both contempt of court and professional misconduct charges, these are distinct offenses regulated by different laws. The National Medical Commission Act, 2019, governs the revocation of licenses for professional misconduct.

Justice Karol further stated, "The grant, regulation, and suspension of the license to practice medicine rest exclusively with the National Medical Commission under the National Medical Commission Act, 2019." The Court reiterated the importance of upholding the statutory provisions in handing down punishments.

In light of the ruling, the suspension of the medical practitioner's license was set aside, and the license was revived. The Court directed the appellant to furnish an undertaking to complete remedial construction to safeguard the existing building within a reasonable time.

This judgment highlights the significance of adhering to statutory provisions while exercising the power of contempt and establishes the distinct nature of contempt of court and professional misconduct as separate offenses.

The legal fraternity has welcomed the Supreme Court's decision, emphasizing the need for a careful and restrained approach to contempt proceedings. The ruling serves as a reminder of the judiciary's duty to protect free speech while upholding the sanctity and efficacy of the judicial system.

Date of Decision: 28 July 2023

GOSTHO BEHARI DAS vs DIPAK KUMAR SANYAL & ORS.