The Supreme Court has reduced the punishment imposed on senior paediatrician Dr. Nigam Prakash Narain from removal of his name from the Indian Medical Register for three months to a mere censure/warning, while holding that the disciplinary proceedings suffered from violation of principles of natural justice.
The bench of Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma partly allowed the appeal filed by Dr. Nigam Prakash Narain against the order of the Patna High Court Division Bench which had restored the disciplinary action initiated by the erstwhile Medical Council of India (MCI), now substituted by the National Medical Commission.
The dispute arose from allegations relating to faculty declaration forms submitted during Medical Council inspections conducted in the academic year 2015-16. Dr. Narain, a senior paediatrician registered since 1976 and former Professor and Head of the Department of Paediatrics at Patna Medical College, had briefly joined Shridev Suman Subharti Medical College & Hospital, Dehradun after retirement before later rejoining Patna Medical College on contractual basis.
The controversy centred around a declaration form signed by Dr. Narain for a Medical Council inspection at Patna Medical College conducted on 5 May 2015. The declaration form allegedly failed to disclose that he had earlier appeared before an MCI inspection team at the Dehradun medical college during the same academic year.
The Supreme Court noted that Dr. Narain was not even present in India on the date of inspection at Patna Medical College, as he had travelled to Amsterdam to attend the 48th Annual Meeting of the European Society for Paediatric Gastroenterology, Haematology and Nutrition (ESPGHAN). His passport and visa documents substantiated his presence abroad during the inspection.
Initially, the Ethics Committee of the Medical Council had concluded in December 2015 that Dr. Narain was not guilty of appearing at inspections of two medical colleges in the same academic year because he was abroad when the Patna Medical College inspection took place.
However, the Executive Committee of the MCI later referred the matter back to the Ethics Committee and raised a different issue — whether Dr. Narain had disclosed his appearance at the Dehradun institution in the declaration form submitted for the Patna Medical College inspection. Eventually, the Ethics Committee treated the omission as serious misconduct and recommended removal of his name from the Indian Medical Register for three months, which was approved by the Executive Committee in June 2016.
The Supreme Court found fault with this course of action and held that the disciplinary authority effectively punished Dr. Narain on a charge different from the one contained in the original show-cause notice.
The Court observed that once Dr. Narain had successfully defended the original allegation regarding fake declaration forms and simultaneous appearance at two inspections, the Ethics Committee could not shift the basis of misconduct without issuing a fresh notice and granting him an opportunity to explain the new allegation.
The bench held: “There has, indeed, been a breach of principles of natural justice.”
Relying on the earlier Supreme Court ruling in Ravi Oraon v. State of Jharkhand, the Court reiterated that a delinquent person cannot be punished on a completely different charge without a fresh show-cause notice and fair opportunity of hearing.
At the same time, the Supreme Court also observed that Dr. Narain failed to satisfactorily explain the incorrect declaration made in the form, particularly the statement that he had not presented himself to any other institution as faculty during the relevant academic year for MCI assessment purposes. The Court stated that such mis-declaration could constitute misconduct and could not simply be condoned.
Despite this finding, the Court took note of several mitigating circumstances, including the fact that nearly a decade had passed since the disciplinary proceedings began, Dr. Narain was now 76 years old, and the disciplinary order had remained under challenge for years with interim protection operating in his favour.
Invoking its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court directed the National Medical Commission to reduce the punishment from removal of the doctor’s name from the medical register for three months to issuance of a censure/warning.
The civil appeal was allowed and the interim orders stood vacated.
Case Details
Case Title: Dr. Nigam Prakash Narain Versus National Medical Commission & Ors.
Citation: JURISHOUR-1121-SC-2026
Case No.: SLP (C) NO. 22707 OF 2023
Date: 06/06/2026
