Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010196932025 2025:GAU-AS:12133 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./2855/2025 AKRAMUL HOQUE ALIAS MD AKRAMUL HOQUE S/O LATE SHAKATUL, AMBIA, R/O VILL. BORBHETI ALIPAR, P.O. HAIBARGAON, P.S. NAGAON SADAR, DIST. NAGAON, ASSAM, PIN 782002 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM, REPRESENTED BY PP, ASSAM. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P D NAIR, MR S R A NASER,MR. H ROHMAN,MR G ALAM Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER 05.09.2025 1. Heard Mr. G. Alam, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. N. Das, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State of Assam as well as Mr. N. Rahman, the learned counsel for the informant/respondent No. 2. Page No.# 2/4 2. This application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Akramul Hoque@Md. Akramul Hoque, who has been detained behind the bars since 12.08.2025 in connection with Nagaon P.S. Case No. 635/2025 under Sections 319(2)/316(2)/336(2)/125/271 of BNS, 2023 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 1771/2025. 3. The gist of accusation in this case is that on 7th August, 2025, one Dr. Abhijit Neog, of Anti Quackery & Vigilance Officer, Assam Council of Medical Registration has lodged an FIR before the Officer-in-Charge of Nagaon Police Station inter alia, alleging that the petitioner has been practising medicine without having being eligible to do so by showing a registration No. which belongs to some other doctor. 4. It is also alleged in the FIR that the petitioner has shown his qualification to be MPT (Orthopaedics) which is an unrecognised qualification. It is also alleged in the FIR that without being eligible to do so, the petitioner is using prefix Dr. before his name and has been practicing allopathic medicine. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that though the accusation levelled against the petitioner in the FIR are not true, he submits that except the Section 316(2) of the BNS, 2023 all other offences which has been shown to have committed by the petitioner are bailable in nature. 6. He further submits that from bare perusal of the FIR, it would appear that there is no ingredient of Section 316(2) of the BNS, 2023 in this case. He further submits that the petitioner has completed his bachelor in physiotherapy degree from Srimanta Sankaradeva University of Health Sciences, Guwahati, Assam which is a recognized University. 7. He submits that the registration No. of the petitioner in the said University is 15777/2014 which is identical to what has been mentioned in the Page No.# 3/4 FIR and therefore, same is not a fake registration number. 8. He also submits that the petitioner is using a pretext “Dr.” before his name as per the clause 3.2 of the handbook published by National Commissions for Allied and Healthcare Professions Competency Based Curriculum under the provisions of the National Commissions for Allied and Healthcare Professions Act, 2021 physiotherapist may use the prefix “Dr.” and suffix “PT.” 9. He further submits that the petitioner has been detained behind the bars since 12.08.2025 and considering all the aspects, he may be allowed to go on bail. 10. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that for the offences alleged in this case, the maximum punishment prescribed may extend only upto 5(five) years, therefore, there was a requirement for issuance of notice under Section 35(3) of BNSS, 2023, which was not issued in this case to the petitioner. 11. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public prosecutor has produced the Case Diary of Nagaon P.S. Case No. 635/2025 and has submitted that there are materials on record that without being an MBBS Doctor, the petitioner was practicing allopathic medicine. 12. She also submits that the petitioner was also using registration number which was allotted to some other doctor and has been using the said registration number in the prescription pad used by the petitioner. She also fairly submits that the investigation has fairly progressed in this case. 13. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides. Though there appears to be some incriminating materials against the petitioner in the Case Diary, however, without commenting on the merits of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that considering the progress Page No.# 4/4 made in the investigation, as well as the period of detention undergone by the petitioner, further custodial detention of the petitioner does not appears to be necessary for fair completion of the investigation of the aforesaid case. 14. In view of the above, the above-mentioned petitioner is allowed to go on bail of Rs. 30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand only) with a suitable surety of like amount, subject to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nagaon with following conditions:- (i) the petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Police Officer and shall co-operate with the investigation; (ii) the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to the informant or to any other person who may be acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing such facts before the Investigating Officer or to any Court. 15. This bail application is accordingly disposed of. 16. Send back to the Case Diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant