Cognizance of criminal charges against medical professionals requires substantial evidence; mere allegations without proof of culpability are insufficient to proceed.

ORDER :

FARJAND ALI, J.

1. The instant petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) has been filed by the petitioners challenging the order dated 19.01.2013, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No.2, Jodhpur Metropolitan through a common order arising out of different criminal revision petitions No. 72/2009 and 73 /2009. By the said order, the learned revisional court dismissed the revision petitions filed by the petitioners while affirming the order of Cognizance dated 19.04.2008 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Jodhpur City, in criminal Complaint No. 54/2007 against the petitioners for offences punishable under Sections 420 , 467, 468, 471, and 120B of the INDIAN PENAL CODE (IPC).

Facts

2. It is apposite to delineate the factual matrix of the case in a concise manner as follows:

2.1 On 14.08.2007, the complainant respondent no.2, Nand Lal Vyas, filed a complaint before the learned Civil Judge (JD)-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Jodhpur City, alleging that his brother-in-law, Shri Prakash Narayan Purohit, was admitted to Escorts Goyal Heart Centre, jodhpur on 03.10.2006, and he passed away during the course of his treatment. Post his demise, the hospital administration refused to provide complete medical records, including pathological reports, despite repeated requests.

2.2. It was further contended by the complainant, that when the treatment records and reports were provided on 29.11.2006, the complainant identified discrepancies in the pathology reports more particularly regarding the inconsistency with the signatures so appended over the pathological reports. That the complainant got the same examined by a private handwriting expert who in turn suggested that the signatures were found to be appended by different persons over the reports.

2.3 Further more it was alleged in the complaint that the hospital administration, in collusion with the treating doctor, allegedly generated false bills based on fabricated pathological reports. Despite knowing the reports were false, the doctors prescribed a flawed medical treatment plan, which ultimately proved fatal for the deceased. The complainant was charged a total of Rs.22,040 for the pathological reports and Rs.88,815 for the entire treatment and medical expenses, all of which are claimed to be based on false and fabricated reports and actions.

3. The learned trial court in support of the complaint filed by the complainant, proceeded to initiate the process of taking cognizance by recording the statements under Sections 200 and 202 of the Cr. P. C., of the complainant Nand Lal Vyas as CW-1 and Natwar Vyas as CW -2, whereafter took cognizance of the offences vide order dated 19.04.2008 as mentioned supra and thereafter, issued process against petitioners through bailable warrant.

Submissions

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners, as directors of Goyal Hospital and Research Centre Pvt. Ltd., cannot be held vicariously liable for alleged criminal acts without establishing specific culpability.

5. Further it was argued that, the Rajasthan Medical Council's Penal and Ethical Committee found no mala fide intentions or misconduct by the hospital as well as with respect to the petitioner Dr. Ashok Kumar.. It was further submitted that the allegations of fabricating or conducting unauthorized pathological tests are baseless. The 27 pathological reports in question were prepared by authorized personnel under the supervision of Dr. Ashok Kumar, a qualified pathologist. There is no evi