Fake doctors, medical degrees: SC junks plea seeking disclosure of NMC verification mechanism
Supreme Court of India
New Delhi: The Supreme Court today (September 16, 2026) dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking directions to the National Medical Commission (NMC) to disclose the verification mechanism currently undertaken before a person gets permission to practise medicine.
Appearing before the Apex Court bench, the petitioner sought directions for audit of the medical regulations and the constitution of an expert committee to look into the issue of alleged fake medical degrees, forged qualifications and unqualified persons practising medicine.
While dismissing the plea, a bench comprising Justices PS Narasimha and Alok Aradhe rebuked the petitioner for the manner in which PILs were being drafted and filed. Besides, Justice Narasimha also questioned the practice of filing PILs immediately after issues are raised in newspaper reports.
According to a PTI report, the bench remarked, "You file one PIL per week. What kind of petitions do you draft? You have made it a factory. That's what, every week you file writ petitions. You draft the moment you see news. You file these petitions for publicity and popularity? Just don't pile us with petitions like this routinely."
Also Read: West Bengal Health Department probes 5 doctors over alleged fake degrees
Lawbeat has reported that the petitioner submitted before the top court bench that the PIL concerned the life and safety of patients and also addressed the issue of fake doctors and forged medical degrees. He also submitted that this was his second PIL and had been filed in June. "A fake medical degree in the hands of a person is not merely a paper form… it is a loaded weapon placed inside a hospital," he said.
He also clarified that he was not pressing the larger prayers at this stage and submitted that his submissions were restricted to the prayer seeking the disclosure from the NMC regarding the verification process currently undertaken before allowing a person to practice as a medical professional.
Details of the PIL:
The PIL, filed under Article 32 of the Constitution, reportedly questioned whether a person could be allowed to enter, remain in, or continue the medical profession by the strength of medical qualifications that had not undergone a reliable, auditable, and fraud-resistant verification process, reports Lawbeat
Filing the PIL, the petitioner argued that the right to life guaranteed under Article 21 also included the right to safe, competent and lawfully qualified medical treatment. The PIL stated that the State could not expose patients to treatment by persons whose qualifications were forged, doubtful, unverified, or fraudulently procured.
The PIL stated that it did not seek the creation of a new policy through judicial legislation, but enforcement of the existing statutory architecture.
The PIL further referred to the NMC Ethics and Medical Registration Board being entrusted with maintaining the National Register of licensed medical practitioners under Section 27 of the National Medical Commission Act, 2019 and Section 31 provided for the National Medical Register, its maintenance, electronic form, publication and synchronisation with State Medical Registers.
Further, the PIL also referred to Section 33 and 34 of the NMC Act 2019 to argue that the registration and a licence to practise constitute the legal gateway for lawful medical practice, while Section 57 of the NMC Act empowers the framing of regulations for carrying out the purposes of the Act.
The petitioner contended that these provisions, together, require a system of lawful qualification, verified registration, licensing, public accessibility, and exclusion of unauthorised practice, adds Lawbeat
Further, the PIL further pointed to several incidents that involved allegations of fake academic and professional qualifications and stated that the Uttar Pradesh Special Task Force had raided a Hapur-based University in May 2025 and reportedly uncovered 1,372 fake degrees and 262 counterfeit certificates. The PIL also referred to the searches conducted by the Enforcement Directorate in November 2025.
Other news reports that the PIL relied on included the report of Kerala Police busting a forged certificate network in December 2025. It allegedly involved more than one lakh forged certificates linked to several universities. Further, the PIL referred to the instance where the Delhi Anti-Corruption Branch busted an alleged fake pharmacy registration racket in April 2025. This involved 47 persons including a former employee of the Delhi Pharmacy Council.
Another instance that the PIL emphasised on is an alleged racket relating to fake Foreign Medical Graduate Examination certificates and fraudulent medical registrations. Busting this racket, Rajasthan Police Special Operations Group had arrested the former Registrar of the Rajasthan Medical Council and the former Nodal Officer of the Council in March 2026.
Clarifying that it did not seek a finding of criminal guilt in that case, the PIL stated that reliance was placed on the incident to argue that allegations of fake medical registration reaching the office responsible for medical registration demonstrated the need for a fraud-resistant and auditable verification mechanism, reports LawBeat.
Reliance was also placed on an affidavit regarding the harm that could arise when patients fail to verify whether the persons treating them were duly qualified and lawfully registered.
Filing the PIL, the petitioner urged the Court for a limited and preventive mandamus for the creation and enforcement of a uniform verification architecture for medical registration in India. Further, the PIL clarified that it did not seek the cancellation of any particular registration without following due process, monitoring of criminal investigations or adjudication of individual medical negligence claims.
It further submitted that any verification audit or adverse action should be conducted only after issuing a notice, providing a hearing opportunity, passing a reasoned order, and granting the availability of statutory appeal, except where interim protective action was necessary to be taken to prevent demonstrable public risk.
The petitioner contended that the PIL was maintainable under Article 32 as the alleged violation happened pan-India, was continuous and systemic, and a single High Court could not effectively address the matter against the Union Government, the NMC, and the State Medical Councils.
Further, the PIL stated that representations had been submitted to the Union Health Ministry and NMC on February 26, 2026 and a reminder was also given on May 31, 2026. However, the petitioner submitted that the representations remained unanswered. The petitioner maintained that the principal relief that it sought was confined to medical qualifications and medical registration under the NMC Act.
It also impleaded the Indian Nursing Council as a proper and pro forma party for the limited purpose to enable consideration of whether a similar verification architecture was required for nursing and allied health professionals. The plea concluded that the medical register must be genuine, verified, synchronised, auditable and publicly reliable to protect the right to life.
