SEWA SINGH Vs. GORAKH PAL RANA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AS alleged in the petition, the petitioner's father was spraying pesticide in the field of respondents No. 5 to 7 on 01.07.2006. He suffered the effect of pesticides. and his body get effected. He was brought to the hospital of respondent No. 1, who is a Doctor. The petitioner -complainant reached the hospital. The doctor allegedly demanded sum of Rs. 50,000/ -from the petitioner. The petitioner states that he had paid this amount. Respondent No. 1 allegedly demanded another sum of Rs. 50,000/ -. The complainant then told respondent No.1 that he should take care of his father and should not bother about money. Respondent No. 1 however, statedly told the petitioner that he would take care of his father only when money was paid to him. It is alleged by the complainant that due to his greed for money, respondent No.1 did not intentionally take care of his father and so he expired on 05.07.2010. On the basis of Ruqa sent, the case was registered.

(2.) THE complainant has wrote an application to Superintendent of Police, Karnal, who registered the case under Section 304 -A IPC. The grievance of the petitioner is that offence under Section 304 IPC was required to be registered instead of 304 -A IPC.

(3.) PLEA is that Court has gravely erred in discharge the remaining accused, who had hatched the conspiracy of murder along with respondent No.1. Even as per the best allegation, no case of conspiracy on the part of the respondent No.2, apparently, is made out from the record. The primary allegations are made against the doctor, who has been summoned for negligence on his part.