The Allahabad High Court has quashed criminal proceedings under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) against a fertility doctor accused of cheating a patient after his wife failed to conceive through IVF treatment. The Court held that the failure of a medical procedure, by itself, cannot establish fraudulent intention or justify criminal prosecution.
Justice Chawan Prakash, while exercising inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., observed that criminal liability for cheating requires dishonest or fraudulent intention from the very beginning of the transaction.
Background
The case arose after Jaiveer Singh approached Dr. Sarita Teotia at Teotia Hospital and Fertility Centre in Bulandshahr for his wife's fertility treatment. According to the complaint, his wife had been unable to conceive since their marriage.
Singh alleged that the doctor offered to help his wife conceive through in vitro fertilization (IVF) and charged Rs. 3.50 lakh for the treatment, which he paid in instalments. He claimed that a receipt was issued for only Rs. 1.60 lakh.
When his wife did not conceive despite receiving treatment, Singh sought a refund. He alleged that the doctor refused to return the money.
Following the complaint, the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bulandshahr, summoned the doctor under Section 420 IPC through an order dated November 30, 2018. Her criminal revision against the summoning order was subsequently dismissed on October 16, 2020, prompting her to approach the High Court.
The High Court examined whether the allegations disclosed the essential ingredients of cheating. It explained that the offence requires deception, dishonest or fraudulent inducement, and an intention to deceive existing from the beginning of the transaction.
The Court emphasised that an unsuccessful medical procedure cannot automatically be treated as evidence of fraud.
"The distinction between a mere breach of contract or medical failure and the offence of cheating depends on the intention of the accused at the time of the inducement. Mere failure to achieve a successful medical outcome does not automatically establish fraudulent intent."
Referring to the Supreme Court's decisions in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal and Jacob Mathew v. State of Punjab, the Court observed that medical science is not an exact science and doctors cannot guarantee successful outcomes.
It further noted that the complainant had failed to demonstrate any fraudulent intention on the doctor's part when the treatment commenced. The amount received represented professional fees for medical services and procedures provided over time.
The Court also criticised the Magistrate for passing the summoning order mechanically without properly examining the allegations and evidence.
"The learned Magistrate has summoned the applicants under Section 420 I.P.C. A perusal of the summoning order shows that the learned Magistrate passed it in a very casual and mechanical manner, without carefully applying his judicial mind."
Finding no prima facie case of cheating against the doctor, the High Court held that continuing the criminal proceedings would amount to an abuse of the process of the court.
Accordingly, the Court allowed the application and quashed the Magistrate's summoning order dated November 30, 2018, the revisional court's order dated October 16, 2020, and the entire criminal proceedings in the complaint case.
Case Details
Case Title: Dr. Sarita Teotia v. State of U.P. and Another
Case Number: Application U/S 482 No. 19362 of 2020
Judge: Justice Chawan Prakash
Decision Date: October 26, 2026
