SUVARNA ARJUN JAYBHAYE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the accused in S.C.C. No. 965/2012 pending before the 3rd Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Beed. The said case is in respect of an offence punishable under section 304A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The petitioner had made an application (Exhibit 14) before the Magistrate contending that there was no material in the chargesheet to sustain the accusations, and that, she be, therefore, discharged. This application was opposed to by the Assistant Public Prosecutor, Incharge of the case. The learned Magistrate after hearing the parties rejected the said application, by an order dated 03.08.2013.

(2.) The facts of the case leading to the prosecution of the petitioner, as reflected from the police report and accompanying documents submitted before the trial Court, are as follows :On 02.08.2011, one Suraj Shendge, aged 5 years, was brought to Ruby Medical Services, Beed by his uncle Ganpat Shendge, the First Informant. It was advised that M.R.I. to be conducted on the said Suraj, who had swelling on his right leg. Suraj was otherwise normal and was able to walk and talk in a normal way. The petitioner is a medical practitioner. In addition to M.B.B.S. degree, she has obtained diploma in Anaesthesia at Yeshwantrao Chavan Memorial Hospital at Pune. The petitioner administered general anaesthesia to the said Suraj, so that M.R.I. could be conducted. That, it took about one and half hour to conduct the M.R.I. and during this period, Suraj was required to be administered repeated doses of anaesthesia. Suraj, however, did not regain consciousness at all. Suraj was, therefore, taken to Deep Hospital, Beed, but as the hospital authorities refused to admit him, he was taken to Civil Hospital, Beed, where he was declared to be dead. Ganpat Shendge, uncle of Suraj thereafter lodged a report with Shivajinagar Police Station, Beed in respect of said incident, which came to be registered as A.D.R. no. 23/2011. Investigation, as contemplated under section 174 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as "the Code"), was carried out. Since the case related to an allegation against a Medical Practitioner of having caused death by rash or negligent act, as per the Government Notification no. MIS2005/ Pra.Kra.

(3.) The allegation against the petitioner is that she had negligently or recklessly administered anaesthesia to the said Suraj, in much larger quantity and this incorrect or improper doses of anaesthesia resulted in the death of Suraj.