Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010154542025 2025:GAU-AS:10642 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/1635/2025 DR ABDUL WAHID S/O FAKAR UDDIN R/O VILL /TOWN- PASCHIM MAUDANGA (KRISHIPAM) P.S. MURAJHAR, SUB-DIV.HOJAI DIST. NAGAON, ASSAM PIN-782445 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP, GOVT. OF ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S K GOSWAMI, MR. C MAHANTA,MR. N BARMAN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/5 BEFORE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER 12/08/2025 Heard Mr. S K Goswami, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Bhaskar Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam for the State respondent. 2. This is an application under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 filed by the petitioner, namely, Dr. Abdul Wahid, by which he has prayed for anticipatory bail in connection with Doboka P.S. Case No. 122/2025 registered under Sections 318(4)/336(3)/350(1) of the BNS, 2023 read with Section 23(1) (2) of the Pre-Conception & Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques Act, 1994. 3. The FIR dated 03.07.2025 reflects that the complainant Dr. Abhijit Neog, Anti Quackery & Vigilance Officer, Assam Council of Medical Registration, Assam has alleged that the petitioner is practicing as a doctor and a Consultant in Neurology from his clinic known as A.T.S. Health Polyclinic without being registered as a doctor. 4. It is stated that the petitioner has declared himself to be a qualified Medical Practitioner, having an MBBS Degree from Pandit Deendayal Upadhyaya Memorial Health Services and Ayush University, Chattisgarh in the year 2020 under a particular enrolment number and that he claims to be a student of Pandit Jawarlal Nehru Memorial Medical College, Raipur, as mentioned in the Internship Certificate and that he also claims to be a Diploma Holder in Clinical Neurology from Sunrise University, Alwar vide a certificate with the specific enrolment number. 5. In the FIR, the complainant further stated that one Jaidul Islam Laskar had lodged a complaint petition before the Assam Council of Medical Registration stating that the petitioner is not a registered Medical Practitioner and that in the said proceeding, the petitioner was summoned to which he did not respond. He further stated that similar complaint has also been lodged to the effect that the petitioner had conducted ultrasonography examinations at his clinic without he being eligible. 6. It is also stated in the FIR that an enquiry was conducted into the allegation of the petitioner. The evidence that were collected reveals that the petitioner did not have any MBBS degree certificate from the Chattisgarh University and that the Internship Certificate as well as the mark-sheets were also doubtful and also that the Diploma said to have been obtained by the petitioner was also said to Page No.# 3/5 be doubtful. 7. It is also stated in the FIR that the wife of the petitioner who claims to have obtained the Diploma in Obstetrics and Gynecology from the Sunrise University was also stated to be doubtful. Police on receipt of the said FIR registered the case under the aforesaid sections and conducted the investigation. 8. Mr. Goswami, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had applied for registration for practicing as a doctor which is under consideration and that he specifically submits that the petitioner had never practiced or treated any patients. He submits that the petitioner owns a clinic but he does not attend to any patients in the said clinic and that his wife being a doctor, she practices there. 9. Mr. Goswami, learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that the petitioner was granted an interim bail vide order dated 17.07.2025 and was directed to comply with certain conditions and one of which is that the petitioner to appear before the Investigating Officer within 7 (seven) days from the date of the said order. 10. Mr. Goswami, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance of the said direction, the petitioner had approached the Investigating Officer for giving his statement and that the said Investigating Officer asked him to produce the documents relating to his certificates as well as the applications for registration etc. However, Mr. Goswami, submits that the petitioner had gone with the documents but the Investigating Officer was not prepared to give him a seizure list in spite of repeated request. Aggrieved with the same, the petitioner had approached before the Superintendent of Police ventilating the said grievance but there was no response from the Superintendent of Police as well. 11. Mr. Goswami, learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner is facing an enquiry before the Ethical Committee of the Assam Medical Council and there he too has to submit his documents and as such, without the seizure list he felt unsafe to hand over the original documents. He further submits that the certificates that he holds are not fake and the same were issued to him by proper authorities of all the Educational Institutions. 12. In view of the same, Mr. Goswami, learned counsel for the petitioner prays that the interim bail may be made absolute in the instant case. Page No.# 4/5 13. Mr. Goswami, learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that the wife of the petitioner against whom allegations were made in the said FIR was granted interim bail initially and the same was made absolute by the learned Sessions Court, Hojai. It is also the case of the petitioner that none of the victims, who is alleged to have received treatment from the petitioner had filed any complaint whatsoever against the petitioner. 14. Mr. Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam by perusing the case diary submits that the authorities of different institutions have informed that the certificates allegedly stated to have been issued by them were not found in the records. He also submits that even the application for registration is not found in the records of the Assam Medical Council and that the said application annexed by the petitioner was not dated. 15. Mr. Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam has further placed the statements of the victim, wherein the victim stated that the petitioner had treated her in the clinic and that she did not recover from her illness, which shows that the petitioner docs practicing without a licence being granted to him by the proper authority. 16. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the records. 17. It is noticed that the petitioner had applied for registration to the Medical Council of Assam vide his application which according to the counsel for the petitioner is under consideration, wherein he had stated that he had acquired MBBS degree from Pandit Jawarlal Nehru Memorial Medical College on 25.06.2021. The provisional registration number was also granted to him on the said application and the registration date was given as 08.03.2024. 18. It is also noticed that he has also completed his Internship on 25.06.2021 and a certificate was issued to him and that the clinic, namely, A.T.S. Health Polyclinic was owned by the petitioner. 19. The petitioner was enlarged on interim bail vide order dated 17.07.2025 and thereafter, he had complied with the conditions and had appeared before the Investigating Officer for recording his statement. As such, this Court is of the opinion that the interim bail granted to the petitioner earlier on 17.07.2025 is made absolute, subject to the full compliance of the terms and conditions specified therein and further, on compliance of the following conditions that - (1) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer every alternate day until the instant case returns in the final form; Page No.# 5/5 (2) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to anyone who is acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case; (3) The petitioner shall not sit in the clinic, i.e., A.T.S. Health Polyclinic or any other place and treat any patients until he receives the registration from the Medical Council of Assam; (4) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the concerned Court without the leave thereof; (5) The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation of the case to his fullest capacity; and (6) If he violates any of the above conditions, the prosecution is at liberty to file cancellation of bail granted to him. 20. With the above observation and direction, this anticipatory bail application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant