528 BNSS No. - 15665 of 2025 Muzammil Husain State of U.P & Anr. v. Counsel

HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

Present application has been preferred to quash the impugned charge- sheet dated 13.08.2021 as well as summoning/cognizance order dated

14.02.2022 including the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 3545 of 2022 (State vs. Muzammil Husain and others) arising out of Case Crime No.147 of 2021, under Section 420 I.P.C., Section 14, 15, 16 of Indian Medical Council Act, 1956, Section 26 of Drugs and Cosmetic Act and Section 25 of Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Regulation & Prevention of Misuse) Act, Police Station-Bansi, District- Siddharth Nagar, pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Siddharth Nagar.

While challenging the entire proceedings of the said case along with impugned chargesheet and cognizance/summoning order, learned counsel for applicant has raised three legal grounds which are as follow:- (i) With regard to cognizance of offence taken under Section 14, 15, 16 of Indian Medical Council Act, 1956, learned counsel for applicant has submitted that Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 has already been repealed on 25.09.2020 and replaced by National Medical Commission Act, 2019 in spite of that, learned court concerned took cognizance of offence under the repealed Act on dated 14.02.2022 and, once any specific Act has been repealed, the process for continuing the prosecution against the applicant become redundant. (ii) In sofar as cognizance of offence taken under Section 26 of Drugs and 2 NA528 No. 15665 of 2025 Cosmetic Act is concerned, learned counsel for applicant has submitted that Section 32 of Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 bars the prosecution of applicant on a police report submitted in pursuance of the FIR hence cognizance taken on its basis by learned court concerned, may be liable to be quashed as the cognizance of offence can only be taken on a complaint if preferred by an authorized person. (iii) In sofar as cognizance of offence taken under Section 25 of Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Regulation & Prevention of Misuse) Act, 1994 is concerned, learned counsel for applicant has submitted that as per Section 28 of the Act of 1994, no court shall take cognizance of offence except over the complaint preferred by competent authority in case of violation or offences carried out by any person as prescribed under the Act of 1994.

On the above grounds, learned counsel for applicant has submitted that entire proceedings of the said case along with impugned chargesheet and cognizance/summoning order, may be quashed.

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer as made in the application but did not dispute the legal grounds as raised by learned counsel for applicant.

After having the rival submissions of learned counsel for parties and perusal of the material available on record, the Court finds that the legal arguments which have been raised by learned counsel for applicant, seem to be justified since Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 wherein cognizance of offence taken, has already been repealed on 25.09.2020 and replaced by National Medical Commission Act, 2019 and as such, any action or cognizance taken under the repealed 1956 Act is indeed void. In sofar as cognizance of offence taken under Section 26 of Drugs and Cosmetic Act is concerned, the same can also not be taken on a police report except on a complaint if preferred by an authorized person as per Section 32 of the said Act. In sofar as cognizance of offence taken under Section 25 of Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Regulation & Prevention of Misuse) Act, 1994 is concerned, as per Section 28 of the Act of 1994, no court shall take cognizance of offence except over the complaint preferred by competent authority in case of violation or offences carried out by any person as prescribed under the Act of 1994. In sofar as attraction of Section 420 IPC is concerned, the same has been fastened upon the applicant in connection with the offence of said Special Acts.

In view of the aforesaid discussions, impugned charge-sheet dated 3 NA528 No. 15665 of 2025

13.08.2021 as well as summoning/cognizance order dated 14.02.2022 including the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 3545 of 2022 (State vs. Muzammil Husain and others) arising out of Case Crime No.147 of 2021, under Section 420 I.P.C., Section 14, 15, 16 of Indian Medical Council Act, 1956, Section 26 of Drugs and Cosmetic Act and Section 25 of Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Regulation & Prevention of Misuse) Act, Police Station-Bansi, District- Siddharth Nagar, pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Siddharth Nagar, are hereby quashed.

However, it is made clear that this order shall not preclude the competent authority to re-initiate the matter against applicant, if so required, in strict consonance of the procedure as discussed above. September 12, 2025 Vivek Kr. (Saurabh Srivastava,J.)