Doctor’s License Cannot Be Suspended By Court As Penalty In Contempt Proceedings: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Friday held that a medical practioner’s license cannot be suspended as penalty in contempt proceedings.

A division bench of Justice B R Gavai and Justice Sanjay Karol observed:

“A medical practitioner guilty of contempt of Court may also be so for professional misconduct but the same would depend on the gravity/nature of the contemptuous conduct of the person in question. They are, however, offences separate and distinct from each other. The former is regulated by the Contempt of Court Act, 1971 and the latter is under the jurisdiction of the National Medical Commission Act, 2019. “

The Apex Court was considering an appeal filed against the judgement of a division bench of the Calcutta High Court which upheld various orders of a single bench that suspended the appellant’s medical license as penalty in the contempt proceedings initiated against him. The case against the appellant was that he had unauthorizedly constructed a structure which deviated from the plans sanctioned by the Siliguri Municipal Corporation

“Whether the suspension of the Petitioner’s license to practice medicine is alien to the nature and types of punishment and penalties specified under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971?” was the question to be considered by the Apex Court in the said case.

The Apex Court noted the National Medical Commission Act of 2019 governs the issuance, regulation, and suspension of medical practice license in India. A statutory body known as the National Medical Commission has the exclusive authority to take disciplinary action against registered medical practitioners for misconduct as defined by the Act. The Act itself outlines a comprehensive mechanism for revoking the license of a registered practitioner in cases of professional misconduct. The process revoking license involves conducting an inquiry and, ensuring a fair hearing for the practitioner before a decision is made, the Court observed.

The Top Court opined that it is trite law that power of contempt must be used by courts judiciously and sparingly:

“ The Court has time and again asserted that the contempt jurisdiction enjoyed by the Courts is only for the purpose of upholding the majority of the judicial system that exists. While exercising this power, the Courts must not be hypersensitive or swung by emotions but must act judiciously.” the Court stated.

The Court also concluded that Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act only envisages fine and simple imprisonment as punishment for contempt. The Supreme Court accordingly set aside the order of the division bench and the various orders of the single bench.

“ this Court has no hesitation in holding that the punishment handed down to the contemnor is entirely foreign to the Act and, therefore, unsustainable. The Court, in awarding such punishment showed complete disregard for the statutory text of the Contempt of Courts Act 1971, which is abundantly clear in respect of the punishment that can be imposed thereunder”

The Apex Court hence allowed the appeal and revived the licence of the appellant to practice medicine.

Adv. Yashwant Singh, Adv. Ms. Deeksha Tripathi, Adv. Harshit Goel, Adv. Ashish Kumar Pandey, Adv. Adv. Kheyali Singh, AOR appeared for the petitioner.

Adv. Anwesha Saha, AOR. Adv. Deborshi Dhar, Adv. Salim Ansari appeared for the respondent.

Case Title: Gostho Behari Das V. Dipak Kumar Sanyal & Ors, Civil Appeal No.4725 Of 2023

Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 577; 2023 INSC 653

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment