ARJUN CHARAN DASH Vs. STATE OF ODISHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Invoking the jurisdiction under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C. the petitioner moved the present petition for quashing of the FIR, order of cognizance dtd. 7/1/2014 and the criminal proceeding in connection with G.R. Case No.2202 of 2013 pending before the court of learned S.D.J.M., Puri arising out of Kumbharpada PS Case No.370(6) dtd. 5/11/2013 for an offence punishable under Sec. 304(A) IPC on the ground that the same is not tenable in law.

(2.) Briefly stated, the petitioner is a Gynecologist and at the relevant point of time, he was running a clinic by name Shri Krishna Health Care and Reproductive Research Centre situated at Puri. By then, the complainant had been admitted in the clinic on account of being pregnant. In fact, some issues arose when the complainant had completed 39 weeks of pregnancy and for that, she had to be under the treatment of the petitioner. During that time and in course of such treatment, the complainant had leakage of fluid which was responded as a normal symptom. However, the complainant was dissatisfied with the line of treatment and the manner in which the case was handled by the petitioner. Finally, the complainant suffered death of her foetus for which caesarean delivery was initially not advised but at the end, it was resorted to. According to the complainant, she was administered with unnecessary medicines and injections which proved to be fatal for the foetus. With the above allegations, the complainant lodged the FIR consequent upon which Kumbharpada P.S. Case No.370(6) was registered which ultimately resulted in the submission of chargesheet against the petitioner under the alleged offence.

(3.) As pleaded by the petitioner, the allegations to be baseless and there has been no medical negligence which is claimed by the complainant and in absence of any material, much less a prima facie case, the criminal proceeding which is otherwise an abuse of process of law should not be allowed to continue, rather, terminated in the interest of justice. It is further pleaded that there was no mens rea for the alleged offence and despite that the learned court below took cognizance of the offence under Sec. 304(A) IPC and summoned the petitioner which is palpably illegal and thus, not tenable in law.