John Michael Cunha ORDER
John Michael Cunha, J.
1. Petitioners are aggrieved by the prosecution initiated against them in Crime No. 159/2015 for the offences punishable under Sections 7 and 19 of the Karnataka Private Medical Establishment Act, 2007 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short) and Section 420 of Indian Penal Code.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned HCGP appearing for respondents.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has put forth a plea that the action initiated by the respondent is contrary to the provisions of the Act. As per Section 19A of the said Act, the Court is debarred from taking cognizance of the offence under the Act except on a written complaint by the Registration and Grievance Redressal Authority or any officer authorized in this behalf by the Registration and Grievance Redressal Authority.
4. In the case on hand, the complaint was sent by the District Health Officer directly to the police through post and based on the said complaint, FIR has been registered against the petitioners for the above offence contrary to Section 19A of the Act and therefore, solely on this ground impugned proceedings are liable to be quashed.
5. Learned HCGP appearing for the respondent however has argued in support of the impugned action and has prayed for dismissal of the petition.
6. Records disclose that the FIR in Crime No. 159/2015 is registered by Shanivara Santhe police on the basis of the written complaint received from the District Health Officer through post. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 7 and 19 of the Act and Section 420 of Indian Penal Code. The allegation in the complaint is that the petitioners herein have been running a private clinic without obtaining licence from the competent authorities established under the said Act. Though Section 420 Indian Penal Code is incorporated in the FIR, the complaint does not disclose the ingredients of Section 420 Indian Penal Code. The said section appear to have been incorporated only to assume jurisdiction on the respondent police. But in the absence of any allegations or material in support of the said charge, registration of FIR incorporating Section 420 Indian Penal Code is malafide and on that score, the action of the respondent has to be held as illegal.
7. Section 3 of the Act requires prior registration to run any private medical establishment. The said provision reads as under:-
"3. Registration of Private Medical Establishments-On and after the appointed day, no Private Medical Establishment shall be established, run or maintained in the State except under and in accordance with the terms and conditions of registration granted under the Act.
Provided that a Private Medical Establishment in existence immediately prior to the appointed day shall apply for such registration within six months from the date of commencement of the Karnataka Private Medical Establishments (Amendment) Act, 2012 and pending orders thereon may continue to run or maintain till the disposal of the application and shall comply with the provisions of this Act."
Section 7 of the Act deals with the procedure for disposal of application for registration of private medical establishment. Any person aggrieved by the order passed on the application submitted by him is required to approach the Registration and Grievance Redressal Authority.
Section 19 provides for penalties for violation of the provision of the Act. The Section reads as follows:-
"19. Penalties-(1) Where any person establishes, runs or maintains a Private Medical Establishment without registration granted under Section 7 he shall, on conviction, be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and with fine which may extend upto one lakh rupees.
(2) When a person is convicted under subsection (1), the Registration and Grievance Redressal Authority shall direct immediate closure of the unregistered Private Medical Establishment, except where a registration is cancelled or suspended and an appeal filed against such cancellation or suspension is pending.
(3) Every order made under sub-section (1) shall contain a direction that the inpatients of such unregistered Private Medical Establishment shall be transferred to such other Private Medical Establishment as may be specified in that order and it shall also contain such other provisions as to the care and custody of such inpatients pending such transfer.
(4) Where any person runs or maintains a Private Medical Establishment in contravention of the conditions or registration or contravenes the provisions of Section 12 or 13, or fails to comply with the direction issued under sub-section (2). he shall, on conviction, be punished with a fine which may extend to twenty five thousand rupees and in the case of a second or subsequent offence with a fine which may extend to fifty thousand rupees.
(5) Where a person contravenes any other provision of this Act or the rules made thereunder he shall, on conviction, be punishable with a fine which may extend to one lakh rupees.
(6) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, whoever makes any false and frivolous or vexatious complaint under this Act shall be punishable by the Registration and Grievance Redressal Authority with a fine which may extend to ten thousand rupees.
8. Section 19A of the Act debars the Court from taking cognizance of the offences committed under the Act except on the written complaint by the Registration and Grievance Redressal Authority or any officer authorized in this behalf by the Registration and Grievance Redressal Authority. The Section is extracted here below:-
"19A. Cognizance of offence-No court shall take cognizance of offence under this Act except on a written complaint by the Registration and Grievance Redressal Authority or any officer authorized in this behalf by the Registration and Grievance Redressal Authority;
Provided that nothing in this section shall prevent the aggrieved person to approach the competent court after exhausting the remedies available under this Act and in case the Registration and Grievance Redressal Authority or the authorized officer fails to make written complaint within thirty days from the date of application to make a complaint."
Though the stage of taking cognizance by the Court has not yet reached, yet, in view of the above provision, the jurisdiction of the police to investigate into the alleged violation of the provisions of the Act based on the information lodged by a private person has been impliedly barred. The Act contemplates prosecution of the offenders for the violation of the provisions of the Act only in the manner provided under Section 19A of the Act. When the Act contemplates a particular procedure, the police in exercise of their general powers under Criminal Procedure Code cannot usurp jurisdiction to register the case and investigate into the matter. Since the FIR in question is registered by the police contrary to Section 19A of the Act, the registration of the case and the consequent investigation thereon has to be held as illegal and hence, to act ex-debito justitiae to do real and substantial justice and to prevent the police from abusing their powers and also to secure the ends of justice, it is necessary to exercise the inherent powers under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to quash the impugned proceedings.
Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The prosecution initiated against the petitioners in Crime No. 159/2015 for the alleged offences is quashed. Liberty is reserved to the Officer authorised under the Act to proceed against the petitioners for the alleged contraventions in accordance with law.
© Manupatra Information Solutions Pvt. Ltd.