The Supreme Court reduced the penalty imposed on retired paediatrician Dr. Nigam Prakash Narain, holding that punishment on a new or alternative charge without giving a fair opportunity to respond violates disciplinary fairness.
The Supreme Court, on May 6, held that an employee cannot be punished on a new charge without a fresh show-cause notice.
A Bench of Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma passed the ruling while hearing an appeal filed by retired paediatrician Dr. Nigam Prakash Narain.
The authorities had removed Dr. Narain’s name from the Indian Medical Register for three months.
Case Concerned Faculty Declaration During NMC Inspection
The case arose from a declaration form submitted during an inspection by the National Medical Commission at Patna Medical College.
The authorities alleged that Dr. Narain did not disclose his earlier service as a faculty member at another institution.
Initially, they issued notice to him on a different charge. They alleged that he had submitted a fake faculty declaration form.
Dr. Narain successfully defended that charge before the Ethics Committee.
However, after the matter went back for reconsideration, the authorities found him guilty of an act of omission. This charge was different from the original allegation of submitting a fake faculty declaration.
Patna High Court Proceedings
Dr. Narain challenged the decision of the Medical Council of India before the Patna High Court.
The Single Judge allowed his writ petition and ruled in his favour.
However, the Division Bench reversed that decision in an intra-court appeal.
Therefore, Dr. Narain approached the Supreme Court.
Supreme Court Finds Serious Flaw In Disciplinary Process
The Supreme Court disagreed with the High Court to the extent it upheld guilt on a new charge.
Justice Dipankar Datta authored the judgment.
The Court said the authorities could not punish Dr. Narain on a new or alternative charge without giving him a fair chance to respond.
The Court relied on Ravi Oraon v. State of Jharkhand, 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 1009.
In that case, the Supreme Court had held that once an employee successfully defends a charge, the disciplinary authority cannot punish him on a completely different charge without issuing a fresh show-cause notice.
Court Notes Failure To Explain Mis-Declaration
At the same time, the Supreme Court noted that Dr. Narain had not properly explained the omission in the declaration form.
The omission related to his earlier engagement with another institution.
The Court added that failure to explain such a mis-declaration could amount to misconduct.
It also said the Executive Committee could not have condoned the mis-declaration.
Punishment Reduced Under Article 142
The Supreme Court then considered Dr. Narain’s age.
He was 76 years old.
Therefore, the Court declined to sustain the punishment of removing his name from the Indian Medical Register for three months.
Instead, the Court exercised its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution.
It reduced the penalty to a censure/warning.
Accordingly, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal in these terms.
Case Details
Case Title: Dr. Nigam Prakash Narain v. National Medical Commission & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 467
Court: Supreme Court of India
Bench: Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma
Key Issue: Punishment on a new charge without fresh show-cause notice
Key Provision: Article 142 of the Constitution of India
