Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/5 vs The State Of Assam on 11 August, 2025
Page No.# 1/5
GAHC010061462025
2025:GAU-AS:10523
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : AB/689/2025
DR FARID KHAN
PRESENTLY RESIDENT OF
VILL- RUHINI PATHAR,
P.O. AND P.S. MURAJHAR
DIST. HOJAI, ASSAM
PIN NO. 782439
PERMANENT RESIDENT OF
ISLAM NAGAR, P/O AND P/S- NILBAGAN,DIST- HOJAI,ASSAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : F K R AHMED, MRS. H THAKURIA
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,
BEFORE
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA
ORDER
Date : 11.08.2025.
Heard Mr. F.K.R. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. P.
Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam for the State respondent.
This is an application under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 praying for grant of pre-
arrest bail to the accused/petitioner, namely, Dr. Farid Khan, who is
Page No.# 2/5
apprehending arrest in connection with the Murajhar P.S. Case No. 207/2024,
under Sections 61(2)/319(2)/336(3) of the BNS, 2023, read with Section
40/42(1)/42(2) of the Clinical Establishment (Registration and Regulation) Act,
2010.
The case diary is received and perused the same.
It is submitted by Mr. F.K.R. Ahmed, learned counsel that the present accused
petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any such offence as alleged
against him in the FIR. The petitioner is a Registered Medical Practitioner
(Alternative Medicines) and he got himself registered with the Indian Board of
Alternative Medicines. He never committed any practice in Allopathic Medicines,
as alleged and the clinic was established only after obtaining due permission
from the concerned authority and in that regard, the registration certification
was also obtained from the District Registration Authority, Nagaon. The
petitioner is authorized to operate his clinic as a single practitioner of Ayurveda,
Unani and Sidha system of medicines. However, the petitioner appointed one
registered medical practitioner in his clinic, namely, Dr. Syed Burhan Uddin for
rendering immediate service to the poor villagers. But the petitioner never
performed any surgery in his clinic as alleged in the FIR. He further submitted
that the only allegation made against the present petitioner is that his brother,
namely, Sharukh Khan gave an injection to the petitioner, wherein there was
some reaction and subsequently it had to be operated and drain out the pass
from the area, wherein the injection was alleged to have been given by his
brother. He used to provide medicines to his patients since last many years
without any complaint from any corner. However, the entire case is based on the
documentary evidence, which has already been collected by the I.O. during the
Page No.# 3/5
inquiry. He further submitted that there is no ingredients to fulfill Section 336(3)
of the BNS and at best, the case may be come within the ambit of Section
40/42(1)/42(2) of the Clinical Establishment (Registration and Regulation) Act,
2010. He further submitted that the petitioner had passed his HSLC examination
in the year 2002 and thereafter, he took admission in Class-XII, in science
stream in Brahmaputra Valley Junior College, Sarumatoriya, Dispur but as the
college was not affiliated under the Assam Higher Secondary Education Council
(AHSEC) during that period, he got his registration under the AHSEC through
Kamrup Academy H.S. School and thus, appeared in the Higher Secondary final
examination from that school.
The earlier bail application of the petitioner was rejected by this Court vide
order dated 24.01.2025, passed in AB No.3175/2024, on perusal of the case
diary. But the present petition is filed as there is sufficient progress in the
investigation and the I.O. has also collected all the required documents during
investigation. However, the petitioner is ready and willing to co-operate with the
I.O. in further investigation of the case, if he is granted with the privilege of pre-
arrest bail. To substantiate the plea that the petitioner has obtained all the
degrees from the University and College, the certificates were also annexed
along with the petition.
Mr. P. Borthakur, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam submitted in
this regard that from the statement available in the case diary and other
materials, it is seen that the petitioner running a clinical shop without proper
authorization and submitted that petitioner is authorized to operate his clinic as
a single practitioner of Ayurveda, Unani and Sidha system of medicines, but he
had performed surgeries, as alleged in the FIR. Mr. Borthakur further submitted
Page No.# 4/5
that from the inquiry report itself, it is very much evident that the team of the
Doctor who enquired the matter, found that as per the advice of the present
petitioner, the co-accused, namely, Sharukh Khan had provided some treatment
and injection to the informant, wherefrom serious physical complication
developed and thereafter, when he consulted with another Doctor, it was
advised to do ultra sonography and then only it has come to the light what kind
of practice is going in the clinic which is established by the petitioner. Mr.
Borthakur further submitted that without any authority for prescribing Allopathic
medicine or to conduct any operation, the present petitioner had playing with
the risk of life of the people who came to his clinic for treatment. Mr. Borthakur
further submitted that the case not only based on the documentary evidence
but custodial interrogation is required to find the real fact of the case.
Accordingly, Mr. Borthakur vehemently objected in granting of the privilege of
pre-arrest bail to the petitioner, which was earlier rejected after perusal of the
case diary. He further submitted that there is no new or urgent ground to
consider the present bail application, which was earlier rejected, on perusal of
the case diary.
Hearing the submissions made by learned counsel for both sides, I have also
perused the case diary, the statement of witnesses vis-à-vis the inquiry report,
submitted by the team of Doctors, after making an inquiry on the basis of the
complaint made by the informant/victim.
It is seen that the present petitioner had established one clinic in Nagaon and
the authority concerned also issued the registration certificate accordingly.
Further, it is also seen that the petitioner annexed some documents to prove
that he got the degree in Alternative Medicines and has the authority to operate
Page No.# 5/5
his clinic as a single practitioner of Ayurveda, Unani and Sidha system of
medicines. But it is seen that by opening the said clinic, the petitioner was
prescribing some Allopathic Medicines and also did some surgeries, without any
authority and having the degree in Alternative Medicines, he cannot prescribe
any Allopathic Medicines and to go for any surgery.
From the statement made by the team of Doctors, during the inquiry, it also
reveals that as per their statement, the petitioner is prescribing some medicines,
stating himself to be a Doctor in Medicine Department and on good faith, the
patients came to his clinic and used those medicines prescribed by the present
petitioner and thus, played with the people’s life, who approached his clinic on
good faith. Further, it is seen that there is no any new and urgent ground to file
the present bail petition, which was earlier rejected after perusal of the case
diary.
Considering the materials available in the case diary and also the other aspects
of the case as well as the nature and gravity of the offence, I find that custodial
interrogation of the accused petitioners may be required for the purpose of
investigation.
In view of the above discussions, I find no reason to allow this pre-arrest bail.
Accordingly, the same is dismissed.
This bail application stands disposed of.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant