Can Doctors Dispense Medicines Without a License?
Court Exonerates Doctor for Dispensing Medicines
The Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court has held that doctors cannot be prosecuted for dispensing medicines to their patients if they adhere to the Drug Rules of 1945. This judgment was delivered by Justice Govinda Sanap while reviewing the case of a psychiatrist from Chandrapur who faced criminal charges for selling medicines to a patient
Background: Criminal Charges Against Psychiatrist
The psychiatrist was accused of selling medicines without a valid license, leading to criminal proceedings under Section 18(c), punishable under Section 27(b)(ii) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940. The case stemmed from an incident on August 2, 2022, where a drug inspector sent a dummy patient to the psychiatrist’s clinic. The doctor examined the patient, prescribed medicines, and sold them to the patient under a bill. Based on this, the drug inspector filed a complaint against the doctor.
Doctor’s Defense: Compliance with Drug Rules
The doctor argued that as a registered medical practitioner, he was exempt from the provisions of Section 18(c) under the Drug Rules, 1945, specifically Rule 123 read with Schedule K, Clause 5. He contended that the medicines he provided were duly accounted for, purchased legally from Suganchand Medical Stores, and of standard quality. Therefore, the prosecution against him was baseless.
Court’s Observations: No Evidence of Unauthorized Sale
The High Court noted that the doctor had maintained proper records of the medicines and had not engaged in unauthorized sales. The court found no evidence that the doctor was operating a pharmacy or selling medicines over the counter to the public. The only allegation was that he dispensed medicines to his patients, which, under the Drug Rules of 1945, is permissible for registered medical practitioners.
Criticism of Lower Court’s Order
The High Court also criticized the Sessions Judge for issuing a summons without recording reasons, stating that the judge failed to apply the necessary legal scrutiny. The court emphasized the importance of recording reasons when taking cognizance of such serious matters.
Conclusion
The Bombay High Court concluded that the psychiatrist’s actions fell squarely within the exemptions provided by Rule 123 of the Drug Rules, 1945, and Schedule K, Clause 5. The court quashed the criminal proceedings against the doctor, stating that the prosecution was not sustainable based on the material on record. The ruling reaffirmed that registered medical practitioners are authorized to supply medicines to their patients within the bounds of the law.
Source: Inputs from various media SourcesÂ
