LAKSHMANAN PRAKASH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Dr. L. Prakash, seeking to quash the proceedings in C. C. No. 3711 of 1998 on the file of II Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai, for the offence under S. 304-I, I. P. C. has approached this Court with this application filed under S. 482, Cr. P. C.

(2.) The petitioner is arrayed as A3 in this case. The accusation contained in the charge sheet against A1 to A3 is as follows :-

(3.) The investigation conducted by the police revealed that Dr. Rajagopal was mainly responsible for the medical treatment of the patient for fracture and he also being the family doctor for the family of the patient was responsible in admitting the patient in Padmini Nursing Home. Similar responsibility and liability rest upon Dr. L. Prakash (A3) being the Associate Doctor of Dr. Rajagopal as he did not check up the medical formalities before commencing the operation. The responsibility and liability for the death of the patient would in a major way lie upon Dr. Parthasarathy, Anaesthetist for negligence by not carefully preparing the patient for the operation through the administration of the required amount of anaesthesia drug. He also failed to check up during pre-operative anaesthesia steps as to whether the patient would withstand 3 ml. heavy local anaesthesia drug Sensorcaine which was given through spinal cord to the patient, suffering from multiple injuries being accident victim who had also sustained head injury. The Doctor who conducted post-mortem gave opinion on the basis of Histopathology report that the deceased died due to lung shock. Dr. Cecilia Cyril, Head of the Department, Forensic Medicine in her second opinion would state that the deceased would appear to have died of acute respiratory failure - a sequalae to spinal anaesthesia administration.