STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs. UDAY SHANKAR HARANJAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is filed challenging he judgment dated 13.8.2007, passed by the I Addl. Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bagalkot, in C.C. No. 10 10/1996, acquitting the respondent -accused of the offence punishable under Section 304A of IPC.

(2.) IT is the case of the prosecution that on 20.11.1995 one patient by name Geeta Patil was taken to the nursing home of the accused viz., Dr. Shirur's Surgical and Maternity Nursing Home, Bagalkot. The wife of the complainant Geeta was complaining of stomach ache and she was taken to the hospital, the accused examined her and directed to undergo Sonography. It was disclosed that she was pregnant by six months. But she was healthy and perfectly normal. However the accused asked the patient to remain in the hospital in the night for observation. The complainant and his wife remained in the hospital. At about 10.00 p.m. the complainant left one Parvatewwa -PW.4 to assist his wife and he had been to his relatives room. At about 12.30 a.m. it was informed by Parvatewwa that the nurse had given an injection to the patient Geeta and thereafter Geeta was taken to the operation theatre. When they rushed to the hospital, they came to know that Geeta was subjected to operation by the accused without getting any consent either of the patient Geeta or her relatives. After some time the accused came out of the operation theatre and told them to bring blood. Since it was midnight, the complainant who is the husband of the deceased Geeta could not get the blood. Subsequently Geeta was brought outside of the operation theatre and they found that the clothes of Geeta were blood stained and her body was found with bandages. They immediately took the patient to Dr. S.S. Hiremath's clinic at Hubli, by hiring a vehicle and on the way Geeta Patil breathed her last near Nargund or Navalgund. Thereafter they took the dead body immediately to their native place Mudalagi and cremated the dead body.

(3.) DURING the trial the prosecution has examined in all 14 witnesses and got marked Ex.P.1 to P. 15 and produced M.O.1 to M.O.17. The defence of the accused was one of total denial. It is the case of the doctor that he has never conducted operation on Geeta Patil and that a false case has been filed against him. The learned Magistrate after appreciating the evidence on record found that the case of the complainant is not believable and acquitted him, since the prosecution did not prove the case against him beyond reasonable doubt. It is this order of acquittal that has been questioned by the State in this appeal.