Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010255502025 2026:GAU-AS:1631 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2728/2025 SK SARTAZUDDIN S/O LT. SK. TABREZUDDIN R/O- JYOTI NAGAR NORTH BONGAIGAON P.S.- BONGAIGAON DIST- BONGAIGAON, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM , REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. D DAS SR. ADV, R KHA,MR. INDRAJIT BHUYAN,MR. M I HUSSAIN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS ORDER Date : 06.02.2026 Heard Mr. D. Das, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr. M.I. Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R.J. Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. This application has been filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Page No.# 2/3 Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for granting pre-arrest bail to the accused applicant in connection with Bongaigaon P.S. Case No. 284/2025 under Sections 319(2)/316(2)/336(2)/125/271 of the BNS. 3. An FIR was lodged on 03.11.2025 by one, Dr. Abhijit Neog, Anti Quackery and Vigilance Officer, Assam Council of Medical Registration, alleging that the accused applicant has been fraudulently using the registration number of one, Dr. Farooq Ahmad Donoo, who is a medical graduate of Russia and using his registration number, the accused applicant has been practicing as a Doctor in Allopathy. On the receipt of the FIR, the same was forwarded to Bongaigaon P.S. and accordingly, Bongaigaon P.S. Case No. 284/2025 under the aforementioned sections has been registered against the accused applicant. 4. The case diary has been received and I have perused the relevant portions of the case diary. I have considered the submissions of the learned Senior counsel and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor. I have also perused the contentions of the bail objection submitted by the I/O. 5. It is submitted by the prosecution that investigation has clearly revealed that the petitioner was practicing medicine at the stated location for a considerable period though he was not qualified to do so. It is contended that upon investigation, it has been found that his projected medical credentials actually pertain to another doctor who is legitimately practicing in Kashimir. In para 4 of the bail objection, the I/O has stated as follows – “The accused has been impersonating a qualified medical practitioner for Page No.# 3/3 a considerable period, thereby endangering the lives of innocent citizens. Such conduct strikes at the core of public health and safety. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in State of Gujarat vs. Mohanlal Jitamalji Parwal (1987) held that offences affecting society at large must be viewed with greater seriousness and bail should not be granted lightly. The act of posing as a doctor and treating patients without qualifications amounts to a continuing threat to society, warranting rejection of bail.” 6. On the basis of the materials which have been revealed by the investigation, the aforesaid contentions of the I/O made in the bail objection cannot simply be brushed aside. Allowing a person to practice a field like medical science without sufficient qualifications could pose significant risks to innocent persons going to that person as patients. 7. The investigation is in progress. Therefore, despite the elapse of time, I am unable to agree that this would be an appropriate case to continue the interim protection to the petitioner. Alternatively, there is no option but to come to the opinion that due to the conduct of the petitioner as revealed by the investigation, he is no longer deserving of the benefit of anticipatory bail. 8. Accordingly, the interim bail granted earlier vide order dated 19.11.2025 stands vacated and the bail payer of the petitioner for anticipatory bail stands rejected at this stage. 9. Send back the case diary. JUDGE Comparing Assistant