AJIT PRADHAN Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner in the present case is seeking the following reliefs:-

(2.) It appears on perusal of the records that a complaint petition was filed in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate at Patna by the opposite party no. 5. She alleged that her husband who was aged about 81 years and retired from the Postal Department in the year 1992 was treated by the petitioner in his hospital between 14/10/2015 and 29/10/2015. In course of consultation when it was noticed that the patient was suffering from Coronary Artery disease, the petitioner being a qualified doctor by profession advised her husband to undergo a procedure known as Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting (in short ..C.A.B.G.. disease). It is alleged that the petitioner assured the informant and her family that the disease would be completely cured. The allegation is that in fact in course of carrying on the procedure of C.A.B.G. the husband of the informant did not survive and he died. Negligence has been alleged on the part of this petitioner in carrying out the procedure.

(3.) The opposite party no. 5 though filed the complaint petition but in the said petition no statement was made that after the Police refused to register her F.I.R., she made an application under Sec. 154(3) Cr.P.C. to the Superintendent of Police. The complaint petition was filed without any affidavit attached with the same. In fact on perusal of the records, it appears that a typed one page affidavit was though attached to the complaint petition but there is no seal and signature of any Notary Public and in course of hearing, it is found to be an admitted position that the complaint was filed without any affidavit.