SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1961 Supreme(Guj) 35

R.B.MEHTA, V.B.RAJU
KUMBHAR NARSI BECHAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: B.R.SOMPURA, M.H.CHHATRAPATI

V. B. RAJU, J.

( 1 ) THE next question is whether the accused must be deemed to have caused the death of Mahendra. Mahendra was admitted in the hospital on 5-3-60 at 9-50 P. M. he was operated some time after 10-30 P. M. the same night and he died at 7-20 P. M. on 11-3-60. According to Dr. Vaidya the cause of death was pulmonary embolism in left lung inflection and shock. In cross-examination the doctor has also deposed as follows :embolism will take place on account of obstruction in circulation of blood in artery. The obstruction may as well as be caused by a clot of blood getting released in arterial circulation as a result of the operation. He would see that the operation would be kept clean and that no clot remains but existence of blood clot in the surrounding area cannot be remedied. No clot remained in the present case. Embolism may take place as a result of fat also. But generally this will not result on account of operation. Generally post operative embolism is the result of blood clot and not fat clot. From this I can say that in the present case embolism was not due to fat clot. Upon a minute microscopic examination it is possible to detect whether embolism found in post




Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top