Resisting Medical Exam Is Not A Crime: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Forest Department Official

Supreme Court, in a significant ruling, held that a person’s initial resistance to a medical examination cannot be equated to obstructing a public servant in the discharge of their duties. A bench of Justice K.V. Viswanathan and Justice Arun Palli observed that unless the essential ingredients of the alleged offences are prima facie met, the continuation of criminal proceedings constitutes an abuse of the process of law.

The appellant, Ashwini Anantrao Deshpande, a forest department employee, was booked under Sections 186 and 189 of the IPC and Sections 110 and 117 of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951, following an incident on May 4, 2021. Allegations surfaced that the appellant was found in an intoxicated state and caused a disturbance, subsequently resisting a medical examination at the Sub-District Hospital in Achalpur. Despite her initial hesitation, the appellant eventually complied and underwent the examination, yet the criminal case remained pending against her.

The primary question before the court was whether the act of resisting a medical examination constitutes the offence of "voluntarily obstructing a public servant" under Section 186 of the IPC. The court was also tasked with determining whether the invocation of provisions of the Maharashtra Police Act and Section 189 of the IPC was legally sustainable given the admitted facts of the case.

Court Explains Scope Of Section 186 IPC

The bench clarified that the offence under Section 186 of the IPC requires a positive act of voluntary obstruction that prevents a public servant from discharging their public function. The court noted that since the appellant eventually underwent the medical examination, the essential element of obstruction was missing.

No Case Under Section 189 IPC

Regarding Section 189 of the IPC, which pertains to holding out a threat of injury to a public servant to induce them to delay or refrain from their duty, the court found the allegations wholly insufficient. The bench remarked that the requirements for the offence were not attracted on the face of the record.

"Taking the prosecution’s case at its highest, the offences as alleged, are not attracted."

Scrutiny Of Maharashtra Police Act Charges

The Court further analyzed the applicability of Sections 110, 112, and 117 of the Maharashtra Police Act. These sections typically prohibit indecent or disorderly behavior in public and the use of threatening or insulting language with intent to provoke a breach of the peace. The court found no material to suggest that the appellant’s behavior met these specific statutory thresholds.

Quashing Of Criminal Proceedings

Concluding that the entire case was a classic instance where the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case, the Supreme Court set aside the order of the Bombay High Court. The bench formally quashed FIR No. 0131/2021 and all consequential proceedings, including the chargesheet pending before the Magistrate at Achalpur, thereby granting relief to the appellant.

Date of Decision: 12 August 2026