Q) Write short notes on ‘Disciplinary Control’?
Ans)
(1) The functions and working of the State Medical Council is similar to those of the MCI.
The main functions are
(i) Maintenance of the medical register
(ii) Disciplinary control
(iii) Erasure of name
(iv) Penal erasure
(2) Disciplinary Control
Disciplinary Control is one of the disciplinary functions of state medical council. Though the
other functions form the bulk of the Council’s workload, it is the disciplinary function, which
is most controversial and receives maximum attention from the medical profession, public
and the press.
The State Medical Council Acts empower the respective council to erase the name of any
doctor from the Register, when convicted of any felony, misdemeanour, crime or offence, or
judged after due enquiry by the council to have been guilty of infamous conduct in a
professional respect (Professional Misconduct). This power of the councils is intended to
protect the public and not to be a punitive measure against attending practitioners, though
the deterrent value is admitted. As erasure or suspension is the most serious professional
disaster, which can overtake the doctor, the disciplinary machinery of the Medical Councils
should be fully understood by every practitioner. The SMC are also authorised to direct the
restoration of name so removed.
(3) Procedure of Disciplinary control
(i) Disciplinary Enquiry - Disciplinary enquiry may arise usually from two sources.
(a) Accusations of professional misconduct either from a member of the public or a
professional colleague or a certain public officer.
(b) A statutory notification from the court officials where a doctor is convicted for any
criminal offence or has been censured by judicial or other competent authority in relation to
his professional character, or has been found guilty of conduct which prima facie constitutes
serious professional misconduct.
(ii) The Council has the same powers as Civil Courts under Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
This makes all the enquiries on the misconduct of doctors to be judicial proceedings within
the meaning of S.193, 219 and 228 of l.P.C.
(iii) On receipt of such a notification or accusation of professional misconduct, the Registrar
of the Council submits it to its president. The Registrar of the Council submits the complaint
to its president. The matter is referred to the Sub-committee or to the Executive Committee,
which considers the complaint. causes further investigation and takes legal advice .
(iv) Rejection of the case - If no prima facie case is made out, the case is dropped and the
complainant is informed accordingly. Protects doctors from frivolous complaints.
(v) If an enquiry is to be made, a notice is issued to the practitioner specifying the nature
and particulars of the charge and directing him to answer the charge in writing, and to
attend before the Council on the appointed day. At the hearing, the complainant or his legal
adviser, and the practitioner must be present.
(vi) If the practitioner admits his fault, he is punished in accordance with the law, but if he
denies the charges, then a detailed enquiry is needed. Both the complainant and the
medical practitioner appear before the Council. The onus of proving the charges is on the
complainant.
(vii) After the Council has heard both the parties and has gone through other evidences, a
vote is taken. The vote decides whether the practitioner is guilty or not. The doctor is
acquitted and case dismissed if no prima facie evidence against the accused.
(viii) If the majority vote confirms that the charge has been proved, the Council must vote
again has to decide the disciplinary actions enumerated below
– Warning: If it is a case of first offense, doctor may be sent back merely with warning not
to repeat the same.
– Suspension: It is the eraser of the name of the doctor from the register for a specific
period considering the gravity of offense, to be reinstalled at the end of the period of
suspension.
(ix) Deletion from the register shall be widely published in local press as well as in the
publications of different Medical Associations/Societies, Bodies.
(x) If the name is erased from the medical register, the State Medical Council informs the
MCI, and the name of the practitioner is automatically removed from the Indian Medical
Register.
(xi) Either party, if not satisfied with the decisions of the State Medical Council may appeal
before the Government of India, who would refer the case to the MCI. The decision of the
MCI is final and binding to both the parties.
