KIRTIKUMAR SANKLESHWAR TRIVEDI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These applications are under Sec. 397 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "Cr.P.C.") taking exception to the order dtd. 25/5/2023 passed below Exhibit-84 in Sessions Case No. 579 of 2011 rejecting application for discharge filed by the applicants.

(2.) The facts which led to the filing of the application can be narrated in brief as under.

(3.) Victim is a minor girl and daughter of informant. She was working in a scrap godown belonging to accused Sunil. On 7/8/2010, though she went for her work did not return home on that day and hence on the next day informant went to the employer making enquiry about her daughter. She was told by the employer i.e. accused Mr. Sunil not to complaint to the police and that the girl will come back. Thereafter, on 9/8/2010 girl was brought from Ghatkopar. The victim told her mother that she would not aware where she had been as she was administered stupefying substance in food. On the same day victim started suffering pain in her abdomen. She was therefore taken to the clinic of one doctor wherein medical treatment extended to her. She was taken to the Rajawadi hospital wherein X-ray and sonography done and she was asked to report on next day. In the meantime, since again her health deteriorated, she was taken to Dr. Singh who had administered some injection to her. She was advised to be taken to Rajawadi hospital. However, before her admission in the hospital she was found dead. Offence came to be registered by C.R. No. 329 of 2010. Postmortem was conducted wherein it was found that the victim had multiple injuries and injection marks were also noticed on her body. During the course of investigation, it was revealed that the victim was donating eggs removed from her ovaries at Rotunda hospital. It was found that such donation process was conducted on 22/10/2009, 15/2/2010 and 8/8/2010. It was also found that the S.O.P. in place for conducting such procedure did not permit the donation of eggs by the women below age of 18 years and inspite of same such procedure was undertaken on victim who is below age of 18. It was found that the doctor who runs the said hospital as well as other doctors who performed the said procedure are responsible for the death of the deceased. As such offence came to be registered against them too.