BASANTILAL CHAUBISA DR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was posted as Medical Jurist in the Government Hospital at Bundi in the year 1985. THE complainant Chhote Khan was involved in some quarrel with others and he, his son Naeem and Nephew Iqbal were injured on 17. 6. 85 THEir injuries were examined by the petitioner. On 186. 85, the complainant Chhote Khan contacted the petitioner for obtaining duplicate copies of the injury reports. THE petitioner took Rs. 10/- by way of fees and supplied the duplicate copies of injury reports of Chhote Khan and Naeem. THE ease of Chhote Khan is that the petitioner asked him to make an extra payment of Rs 30/- and only then the copy of injury report of Iqbal would be spplied. Upon this, Chhote Khan arranged for setting up a trap and on the next day the petitioner was trapped wher he accepted the sum otr8. 30afrom Chhote Khan On this basis a charge under Section 161 IPC and 5 (1) (d) and. (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 has been framed against the petitioner. THE allegation is that the petitioner demanded and accepted an extra sum of Rs. 30/- by way of bribe for issuing the duplicate copy of injury report of the injuries of Iqbal.

(2.) THE order framing the charge has been challenged in this petition. It has been contended that even on the basis of the statement of Dr. Deora Superintendent SMS Hospital Jaipur, as recorded during the investigation, it has come out that the practice is that a sum of Rs. 20/- is charged for issuing copy of one injury report on urgent basis and Rs. 10/- is charged for issuing a copy of the injury report in the ordinary course. He has clarified that urgent basis means isuance of copy within 24 hours. According to his statement, the petitioner could have charged this amount for performing the nonprofessional duty of issuing copies and when he accepted Rs. 40/- tor two copies then it cannot be-said that he has charged any thing extra.

(3.) AS discussed above, this Misc. Petition is accepted and the charge framed against the petitioner is quashed. He is discharged of the offence under Sec. 161 IPC and 5 (1) (d) and 5 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The record of the case be sent immediately. .