Disposed

Kunal Bajaj v. National Medical Commission & Anr.

Delhi HC9 May 2025W.P.(C)/6248/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought directions to the NMC to act on his complaint alleging breach of professional ethics by his former treating psychiatrist who gave evidence against him in domestic violence proceedings. Counsel for NMC noted the need to first approach the State Medical Council. Petition withdrawn with liberty to complain to Maharashtra Medical Council.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to file complaint before Maharashtra Medical Council; direction that such complaint be decided expeditiously by reasoned order within 12 weeks.

Kunal Bajaj Vs National Medical Commission & Anr. — Medical Negligence | Delhi HC (2025)

¶1

$~40

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 6248/2025

¶4

KUNAL BAJAJ .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Giriraj Subramanium, Ms. Reea Mehta, Mr. Prayuj Sharma and Mr. Simarpal, Advocates.

¶5

versus

¶6

NATIONAL MEDICAL COMMISSION & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Bishwa Bandhu, Mr. Bipul Kumar and Ms. Nisha, Advocates for R1.

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN DATTA O R D E R % 09.05.2025

¶9

CM APPL.28480/2025 (Exemption)

¶10

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

¶11

Application stands disposed of.

¶12

W.P.(C) 6248/2025

¶13

The present petition has been field by the petitioner seeking that the respondent no. 1/National Medical Commission be directed to take action against respondent no. 2 [Dr. Rajesh Nagpal, MD, (PGI Psychiatry)], in terms of petitioner’s complaint dated 31.03.2025, inter alia , for violation of the Indian Medical Council (Professional Conduct, Etiquette and Ethics) Regulations, 2002.

¶14

It is submitted that during the period between 2009-13, the petitioner was the patient of respondent no. 2. However, despite the existence of a fiduciary (doctor/ patient) relationship between the petitioner and respondent

¶15

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/07/2025 at 22:33:50

¶16

no. 2, an affidavit of evidence dated 03.02.2025 came to be submitted by the respondent no.2, in capacity of a witness, in support of the case sought to be made out by the wife of the petitioner in proceedings initiated against the petitioner under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005.

¶17

Prima facie , if the averments made the present petition are true, the conduct of the respondent no. 2 is egregious.

¶18

Learned counsel for respondent no. 1 submits that in the first instance, it is incumbent on the petitioner to submit a complaint before the concerned State Medical Council.

¶19

It is noticed that the respondent no.2 is registered before the Maharashtra Medical Council (Annexure P-4).

¶20

In the aforesaid circumstances, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks to withdraw the present petition with liberty to file appropriate complaint before the Maharashtra Medical Council.

¶21

In the event, if a complaint is filed by the petitioner before the Maharashtra Medical Council, the same shall be decided expeditiously by passing a reasoned order, and after affording an opportunity of hearing to the concerned parties, and preferably within a period of 12 weeks from today. 10. The present petition is, accordingly, disposed of.

¶22

SACHIN DATTA, J

¶23

MAY 9, 2025/ at

¶24

Kunal Bajaj v. National Medical Commission & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kunal Bajaj v. National Medical Commission & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Nikon Finlease Pvt. Ltd. Vs Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -04, Delhi & Ors.

Sqn Ldr Swati Prakash Vs Union of India & Ors.

Mr. Vinod Sharma Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi

Ajay Prakash Mishra Vs the Registrar Cooperative Societies through Assistant Registrar & Anr.

Maanoj Agarwala Vs Idbi Bank

Loconav India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Assessment Unit Income Tax Department Delhi and Anr.

Sandeep Chopra Vs Commissioner of MCD & Ors.

Rajkumar Sukhdevsinhji & Anr. Vs Idbi Bank

Mr Govinthu & Ors. Vs Government of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Rajat Sood Vs Delhi State Indusrtrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited

Apollo Tyres Limited Vs Union of India & Ors.

Kapil Dev Vs Life Insurance Corporation of India & Ors.

Naresh Bhardwaj and Another Vs Divisional Commissioner and Others

Gurgaon Gramin Bank Workers Organization through Chief Coordinator Authorised Representative & Anr. Vs Union of India through Secretary Comptroller and Auditor General of India & Ors.