DR.SURESH CHANDRA GUPTA Vs. NCT OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. read with Section 482 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioner seeking regular bail in FIR No. 550/2015, initially registered under Section 315 IPC at Police Station Nangloi, Delhi.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is 70 years of age and in terms of the decision in Jacob Mathew v. State of Punjab and Another , 2005 6 SCC 1, he ought not to have been arrested. She submits that the petitioner is otherwise qualified as a medical surgeon and performed the surgery at the request of the hospital concerned. Lastly, it was submitted that the FIR is of the year 2015 but the petitioner has been arrested on 18.11.2020.

(3.) Learned APP for the State, on the other hand, has vehemently opposed the bail application. She submits that although, initially, the FIR was registered under Section 315 IPC but subsequently, Section 304 IPC was added as the patient had expired. It was also stated that the petitioner, admittedly, was neither on the panel of the hospital nor even a visiting surgeon. The petitioner, knowing fully well that he was not a qualified Obstetrician and Gynaecologist, still performed the surgery when there was no urgency as the pregnancy was only 19-20 weeks old, which led to the death of the patient. Lastly, it was submitted that the charge sheet is yet to be filed and there is a strong possibility that the petitioner may tamper with the evidence.