CLAIM UNDER SECTION 23 (4) OF PUNJAB CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT 2005.
1. The District Officer (Health) Sahiwal reported to the DCO/Authority that defendant Muhammad Azam was a fake doctor and involved in medical practice illegally.
2. The requisite legal notice u/s 28 (1) of the Punjab Consumer Protection Act 2005 was issued to the defendant on 01-8-11. He submitted reply before the DCO/Authority. His assertion was that he was a registered Homoeopathic doctor. However, he denied other allegations leveled against him.
The DCO/Authority referred the matter to this Court for legal proceedings against the defendant for violations of Punjab Consumer Protection Act 2005.
3. The defendant in his written statement, denied allegations leveled against him. According to him, he had not violated the Allopathic System Ordinance 1962 and that no medicines used by allopathic doctor was ever taken into possession by DO (health)
Sahiwal. He further submitted that under settled Homoeopathic laws, he was entitled to use Stethoscope, and other diagnostic instruments.
4. Arguments delivered on behalf of both the parties were heard.
The defendant present in the Court was provided an opportunity of hearing. He was confronted with the detail of the medicines taken into possession at the time of raid by District Officer (Health)
Sahiwal.
5. The defendant admitted that he was using B.P Apparatus, Stethoscope and thermometer.
Regarding to other medicines i.e Syp. Pirizone, Syp. Disprine, Syp Ambofen and Syp. Karamal, he asserted that these medicines were of routine use and such type of medicines are even used by people at their own without prescription. However, he assured that in future, he would not keep such medicines in his clinic and that he would use only Homoeopathic medicines.
6. The defendant present before the Court showed his original documents issued by Government of Punjab and National Council for Homoeopathic which were returned to him after comparing with photocopy thereof already available on the record. According to the certificate of registration issued by Government of the Punjab and National Council for Homoeopathy , the defendant was a registered Homoeopathic medical practitioner and that , he had duly been registered as such u/s 24 of the Unani, Ayurvedic and homoeopathic Act 1965. As per final examination result, the defendant duly passed final examination of diploma in Homoeopathic Medical System in the year 1999. Both these documents leave no room to doubt that the defendant was a Homoeopathic doctor. It being so, he could legally deal with his patients but with Homoeopathic Medicines only. So far as thermometer, B.P apparatus and stethoscope were concerned, as per letter dated 18-05- 2009, Homoeopathic doctor was competent to use that in their clinics for diagnostic purposes.
There was not denial to the fact that no Homoeopathic Doctor was competent to keep and provide Allopathic Medicines to any patient. The medicines i.e Syp. Pirizone, Syp. Disprine, Syp Ambofen and Syp. Karamal taken into possession by District Officer Health from the defendant, appear to be ordinary medicines which are used by people in a general manner. But it would not mean that the defendant being a Homoeopathic Doctor was competent to prescribe these medicines to any patient. If any person uses these medicines as self medication in a personal capacity, that would be his personal risk but a Homeopathic Doctor is not authorized /competent to prescribe allopathic medicines for any patient.
7. In view of the observations recorded above, it is observed that the defendant is a Homoeopathic Doctor. Therefore, strictly speaking, he cannot be blamed as quack doctor however, by keeping allopathic medicines in his clinic, he has violated Allopathic System Ordinance 1962. There was nothing on record suggesting that any harm was caused to any person because of use of medicines prescribed by the defendant. It would not mean that he is being given a license to keep and provide allopathic medicines to any patient. The reference made by DCO/Authority is accepted. The defendant is ordered to destroy all allopathic medicines kept by him in his clinic. He is warned to remain careful in future. He is restrained to prescribed/provide allopathic medicines to any patient. The defendant is apprised that if he is found guilty of providing /prescribing allopathic medicines to any patient in future, a strict legal action may be taken against him including his conviction u/s 31 & 32 of the Punjab Consumer Protection Act 2005.
8. File be consigned after its due completion. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.