RAMESH CHANDRA MOHAPATRA Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code has been filed challenging the order dated 12-2-1997 passed by the learned S.D.J.M. Bhubaneswar in I.C.C. No. 860/96 taking cognizance of offence alleged to have committed under Sections 304-II/ 317/304-A of the Penal Code and issuing N.B.W. against the petitioners and opposite party No. 3.

(2.) Opposite party No. 2 is the complainant who in her complaint alleged that her son Rakesh Kumar Mishra was a student of Class VI in Demonstration Multipurpose School, Bhubaneswar where the petitioners were working as Headmaster and Assistant Teacher respectively. On 27-9-1996 at about 3 p.m. during the school hour it was reported that deceased Rakesh Kumar Mishra sustained severe head injury while getting down the stairs with his class mates. The child was shifted to the school dispensary at about 3.30 p.m. where the opposite party No. 3 who was working as Pharmacist without diagnosing the injury administered some ointments to the injury sustained by the child. After receipt of telephone message from the office of the petitioner No. 1 the complainant contacted the petitioner No. 1 to find out the conditions of the child and it is alleged that the petitioner No. 1 intimated that she should not be worried as the injury sustained is minor one and some scratch marks appear only on his head. Thereafter, after receiving the child from school bus at about 5.20 p.m. she found that the child was in precarious condition and she immediately shifted the child to a nursing Home, thereafter to Capital Hospital and then to S.C.B. Medical College, Cuttack where he succumbed to death. Allegation in the complaint is that due to negligence of Class Teacher, Headmaster as well as Pharmacist of the dispensary located in the school, the child succumbed to death. Had proper care been taken the child could have been saved.

(3.) After the complaint was filed on such allegations, the learned Magistrate took up enquiry under Section 202, Cr.P.C. and in the said enquiry five witnesses were examined on behalf of the complainant. On consideration of the materials available from the statements of these witnesses, the learned Magistrate was of the view that prima facie case for offence under Section 304(II)/ 317/304-A of the Penal Code had been made out and accordingly took cognizance. The said order is the subject-matter of challenge in this application.