In a significant legal development, the Punjab & Haryana High Court recently dismissed the bail application of Faheem @ Faim @ Mohammad Faheem, an individual accused of practicing medicine without proper qualifications, leading to the death of a young man, Leeladhar. The case, CRM-M No. 20042 of 2024, was heard by Justice Namit Kumar, with arguments presented by Mr. Vinod Ghai, Senior Advocate, and Mr. Arnav Ghai on behalf of the petitioner, and Mr. Saurabh Mohunta, Deputy Advocate General (DAG) of Haryana, representing the State.
Details of the Incident:
The incident that led to the filing of FIR No. 296 dated 28.09.2022, under Sections 304(ii) and 201 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 34 of the National Medical Commission Act, 2019, occurred in Manesar, Gurugram. According to the prosecution, Leeladhar, who worked for Maruti in IMT, Manesar, was residing as a paying guest. On 27.09.2022, he tragically died under suspicious circumstances, leading his uncle, Ram Avatar, to demand a police investigation.
CCTV footage from the paying guest facility showed Leeladhar suffering from a fever and visiting Dr. Faheem at Alam Clinic in Village Aliyar for treatment. Ram Avatar alleged that Leeladhar’s death resulted from the wrongful treatment administered by Dr. Faheem, who, according to the complainant, lacked any professional medical degree. Furthermore, it was claimed that after Leeladhar’s death, Dr. Faheem, with the assistance of Shubham, placed the deceased’s body near the paying guest facility to avoid responsibility.
Legal Issues Involved:
The legal issues before the court primarily revolved around the wrongful death of Leeladhar, the qualifications of the accused as a medical practitioner, and the applicability of Sections 304(ii) (culpable homicide not amounting to murder) and 201 (causing disappearance of evidence) of the IPC. The defense argued that the petitioner, Faheem, was innocent and had only administered a Monosef Injection 500 mg, an antibiotic, to the deceased. They contended that the death was due to natural causes, specifically asphyxia caused by food or vomit particles obstructing Leeladhar’s respiratory passages, and not due to any wrongful act by Faheem.
The prosecution, however, asserted that Faheem was practicing medicine without the necessary qualifications and that his actions directly led to the death of Leeladhar. They also emphasized that the petitioner had attempted to dispose of the evidence by abandoning the body, thereby obstructing justice.
Court’s Decision:
Justice Namit Kumar denied the bail application of Faheem. The court expressed concern over the menace posed by unregistered medical practitioners to public health in India. It highlighted the grave risks involved when individuals without proper qualifications or registration practice medicine, often leading to misdiagnosis, improper treatment, and, in this case, death.
Also Read
The court underscored that “Unregistered medical practitioners pose a significant threat to public health in India,” and that despite existing laws and regulations, the practice of medicine without proper qualifications continues to endanger lives. The judgment emphasized the need for a thorough investigation, particularly the examination of scientific and medical evidence to determine the exact cause of Leeladhar’s death.
Given the seriousness of the charges and the potential threat to public safety, the court found no grounds to grant bail to the accused, particularly as the investigation was ongoing and further evidence was yet to be presented in court.
