MUKESH RAGHAV Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed this criminal misc. petition under Sec. 482 Crimial P.C. against the order dated 18.6.2008 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge No.2, Bikaner (hereinafter referred to as 'the revisional court') in Criminal Revision Petition No. 69/2007, whereby the revisional court dismissed the revision petition preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 13.7.2007 passed by the ACJM No. 2, Bikaner. The petitioner has also challenged the order dated 13.7.2007 passed by the ACJM No. 2, Bikaner (hereinafter referred to as 'the trial court') whereby the application filed by the petitioner under Sec. 197 Crimial P.C. was rejected. The petitioner has also prayed that the proceedings qua the petitioner pending in the trial court may be quashed and set aside.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that one Smt. Rekha Jain lodged an FIR No. 9/2002 dated 6.1.2002 at Police Station Sadar, Bikaner while alleging that she was pregnant and was consulting with senior Doctor of PBM Hospital, Bikaner since last six months and as advised, she was admitted in the said hospital on 24.11.2001 and remained in hospital upto 2.12.2001. However, on 2.12.2001, she was transferred to the Labour Room and during her delivery, the child died and her uterus was also removed. It is also alleged in the complaint that death of child and removal of uterus were occurred due to gross negligence of the Doctors and Nurses of the hospital.

(3.) The police after investigation, filed charge sheet against the petitioner and other accused persons for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 316, 338 and 201 I.P.C. Thereafter the trial court took cognizance against the petitioner and other co-accused persons on 3.9.2004 for the offence under Sec. 301/34 I.P.C. The petitioner moved an application under section 197 Crimial P.C. and claimed that before taking cognizance against the petitioner, previous sanction, as required under Sec. 197 Crimial P.C., was not obtained from the Government and, therefore, the trial against the petitioner be quashed and he may be discharged.