IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
TIRTHANKAR GHOSH, J.
Dr. Pritha Dutta – Petitioner
Versus
The State of West Bengal & Anr. – Respondents
CRR 1248 of 2024 With CRR 1242 of 2018 With CRR 1808 of 2018
Decided On : 16-05-2025
JUDGMENT :
Tirthankar Ghosh, J.
The three revisional applications have been preferred challenging the proceedings arising out of Alipore Police Station Case No. 46 of 2014 dated 06.03.2014 under Section 304A/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. The genesis of the present case was on the basis of a letter of complaint forwarded by Somraj Sen husband of the deceased Dr. Arunima Ghosh @ Sen addressed to the Officer-in-Charge, Alipore Police Station. The allegations made in the letter of complaint were to the effect that Dr. Arunima Ghosh @ Sen aged about 31 years was suffering from acute abdominal pain for the last 1½ years. The complainant along with his deceased wife approached Dr. Samir Roy practicing at Nightangle Hospital, Shakespeare Sarani Kolkata and she was under his treatment from the said period and was advised by the doctor to go for a D&C and Laparoscopic Dye Test under a gynaecologist at Kothari Medical Centre on 05.03.2014. At about 8:30 A.M. on 05.03.2014 the complainant’s wife got admitted at the Hospital for the said test. The doctor entered the O.T. at about 09:35 A.M. and subsequently initiated the test, immediately after 20 minutes, the doctor came out and informed the complainant that the operation was successfully conducted but the patient went through a shock and subsequently suffered cardiac failure. Thereafter, the cardiology team came to attend his wife and she was taken to ICCU. During this entire period, the Doctors were unable to revive the complainant’s wife/deceased. As a result the deceased breathed her last. The complainant alleges that his wife did not have any health issues. She was healthy and as such it seems to him that there might have been some negligence made during the aforesaid test as well as inefficiency. The complainant therefore requested the Officer-in- Charge to take steps against Dr. Samir Roy and his medical team of Doctors along with the staffs of Kothari Medical Centre.
3. The background of the case as is reflected from the record which includes the case diary produced on behalf of the state as well as the three revisional applications which incorporates the order sheets of the Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate reflect that initially in connection with Alipore Police Station Case No. 46 of 2014 dated 06.03.2014, a report in final form dated 13.10.2015 was submitted before the jurisdictional Court wherein the Investigating Officer was pleased to discharge the accused persons, holding mistake of fact as the reason of conclusion relating to the death of Arunima Sen @ Ghosh at Kothari Medical Centre. A notice was issued to the de-facto complainant namely Somraj Sen, who filed an application for further investigation before the Learned Magistrate and the Learned Magistrate was pleased to direct further investigation by a different Investigating Officer. The investigation having been conducted by a different Investigation Officer, a report under Section 173 CrPC was filed on 02.05.2018 wherein the Investigating Officer on an analysis of the fact collected in course of further investigation was pleased to prima facie hold that a case has been made out against Dr. Samir Roy and Dr. Jyotsna Basu under Section 304A/34 of the Indian Penal Code; against Nirmala Jaiswal under Section 304A/34 of Indian Penal Code read with 120B/419/420/465/468/471 of the Indian Penal Code; against Dr. Snehapriya Chowdhury, Dr. Chand Ratan Damani, Dr. Satyendra Sahay under Sections 120B/419/420/465/468/471 of Indian Penal Code; against Dr. Rajesh Chattopadhyay under Section 175 of the Indian Penal Code.
4. Consequently, the Investigating Officer prayed for issuance of process against the accused persons. The Investigating Officer filed a supplementary charge-sheet on or about 11.09.2019 wherein on conclusion of investigation and after collection of materials, the Investigating Officer opined that case has been made out against Dr. Pritha Dutta, Dr. Mrinal Kanti Das, Dr. Utpal Chatterjee & Dr. Gan Nayak Pathak under Se
Medical negligence accusations must be substantiated by clear evidence; mere allegations, without expert consensus on negligence, are insufficient for criminal liability.
Medical negligence requires substantial expert evidence to warrant prosecution; mere allegations without solid proof are insufficient.
A negative final report does not bar further investigation and prosecution in cases of medical negligence requires substantial expert evidence.
Criminal negligence in medical cases requires a higher degree of negligence than civil liability; sufficient prima facie evidence can justify prosecution without expert testimony.
Criminal liability under IPC 304-A for medical negligence requires prima facie gross negligence by ordinary competent doctor standard; no prosecution without material proving rash act, as simple erro....
Criminal liability for medical negligence requires proof of a higher degree of negligence than mere error of judgment, as established in Jacob Mathew v. State of Punjab.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.