These two petitions are by the accused 1 and 3 facing prosecution for offence punishable under Section 304-A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 in C.C. No. 776 of 2009 on the file of Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division) and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dharwad, issuing process against them.

2. The petitions are posted for admission after notice to the respondent-complainant and the State.

3. Heard.

The petitions are admitted and taken up for final disposal.

4. The facts relevant for consideration are:

One Yellanagouda Dharmanagouda Patil lodged a report at Sub-Urban Police Station, Dharwad, stating that on 1-2-1991 his brother Basanagouda Dharmangouda Patil along with 7 to 8 persons were proceeding towards their field situated near Garag Road for harvesting the crops in the trailer of his tractor. When the tractor reached Veerappana Lake after climbing over a mud heap capsized on the left side canal. Due to such mishap, 3 to 4 persons suffered simple injuries and his brother sustained injuries to his thigh. On receiving information about the accident, he rushed to the place of accident, by which time the villagers brought his brother to the District Hospital, Dharwad and admitted him at 3.30 p.m. He approached Dr. Doddamani, Dr. Hebbal, Dr. Kulkarni at the said hospital as also the District Surgeon requesting for proper treatment to be given to his brother.

5. Dr. Doddamani, the petitioner in Criminal Petition No. 7203 of 2010 (accused 1) examined his brother and told there was nothing serious to worry about. However, on 2-2-1991 when he met Dr. Doddamani, he told him he has to spend Rs.2,000/-. Accordingly, the complainant gave Rs.2,000/- to Dr. Doddamani-accused 1. On 3-2-1991 when he went to hospital Dr. Doddamani and Dr. Kulkarni (petitioner in Cr. P. No. 7219 of 2010) were in the room. Again Dr. Doddamani demanded money to be given to other doctors and said Rs.2000/- is to be paid to Dr. Kulkarni. At that time, there was some protest by the members of Rytha Sangha outside the hospital against the demand of money by the doctors.

6. In the complaint, the complainant alleged he has given Rs.2,000/to the accused 3-Dr. Kulkarni apart from giving money to Dr. Doddamani. Since the Rytha Sangha members were agitating against the demand of money, the petitioners herein asked him to get lost from the hospital in view of the protest.

7. On 4-1-1991, in the morning when he went to hospital, he noticed no treatment was given to his brother and he was in critical condition. He rushed to the room of Dr. Kulkarni and Dr. Doddamani, but he could not meet them. Hence, he met Dr. C.M. Patil who was District Surgeon and informed him of the inaction on the part of the petitioners. It is stated that the District Surgeon expressed his inability to help him as the petitioners were not heeding to his advise to take care of the patients. However, the District Surgeon directed the 2nd accused-Dr. Hebbal to attend the victim. Dr. Hebbal after examining the complainant's brother informed him patient has to be operated on 5-11991 and asked him to arrange for blood. But no operation was performed till the next day. At 5.00 p.m. his brother expired succumbing to the injuries.

8. The main allegation of the complainant is the petitioners were in charge of treating the patient in the hospital along with accused 2-Dr. Hebbal. None of them treated his brother. Due to deliberate omission consequent to which for want of medical treatment his brother died. He filed complaint on 24-2-1991 before the SHO of Sub-urban Police Station, Dharwad, which was investigated in Crime No. 54 of 1991. The Investigation Officer filed final report before the Judicial Magistrate First Class only on 12-12-1997, after a lapse of six years, in the form of B Summary Report indicating no prima facie case to proceed against the petitioners for the offences alleged. The complainant resisted acceptance of the B-summary report, consequent to which he filed protest pet