The judgment establishes that negligence in criminal law, especially in cases involving medical professionals, requires a higher degree of negligence, amounting to gross negligence, and emphasizes the need for caution in prosecuting medical professionals for criminal negligence.

1. The Petitioner-Dr. Neeru Gupta in the instant petition filed under Section 561-A Cr.P.C implores for the grant of the following reliefs in her favour:-

“(i) Quash the order impugned passed by the learned Session Judge, Rajouri dated 05th August, 2011, as a consequence of which the order of the CJM, Rajouri has been upheld for reinvestigation of the case in FIR No. 403/08 under Section 338 of RPC.

(ii) Direct the closure of the case by accepting the report of I.O. based on opinion of Medical Board of Doctors.

(iii) Direct the concerned respondents to produce the entire record of the case before this Hon’ble Court.

(iv) Pass any other order or direction as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstance of the present case.”

2. The facts, as these emerge from the study of the file under consideration are, that the complainant, namely, Shri Tahir Shah filed a Complaint before the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rajouri (in brevity, the CJM) on 05th November, 2008, wherein he stated that his wife was pregnant. On the 12th of July, 2008, she was admitted in Government District Hospital Rajouri. She delivered a female baby on the 13th July, 2008 under the supervision of Dr. Neeru Gupta. On being born when the baby was examined by Dr. Koul, Children Specialist, posted as such in the District Hospital, Rajouri, he declared that the child was suffering from Erbs Palsy and these injuries were caused due to the damage cause to the network of nervous system during her birth, as a result of excessive force being applied to the infant’s head during delivery. The complainant alleged that this injury was caused to the newly born baby due to the rash and negligent act of the petitioner-Dr. Neeru Gupta, while conducting the delivery of his wife. On the perusal of the complaint, the learned CJM, Rajouri forwarded the same to the authorities of its Police Station, Rajouri, for taking necessary action under law. On the receipt of the Complaint with the endorsement of the learned CJM, Rajouri, the police authorities of Police Station, Rajouri registered an FIR bearing No. 403/2008 at police of Police Station, Rajouri, with which the investigation commenced.

3. On the culmination of the investigation of the case, the police authorities concluded that the allegations leveled in the Complaint are not made out against the petitioner and, accordingly, a Final Closure Report u/s 169 Cr. P.C was laid before the Court of the learned CJM, Rajouri. The complainant appeared before the Court of learned CJM, Rajouri with a request that the case be reinvestigated. After recording the statement of the Complainant and on assessing and evaluating the entire material on record, the learned CJM, Rajouri directed the police authorities to reinvestigate the case in accordance with the law so that the ends of justice could be secured. The learned CJM, Rajouri did not accord approval to the Closure Report and declined to accept it.

4. The petitioner assailed the order of the learned CJM, Rajouri in a Revision filed before the learned Session Judge, Rajouri and the learned Session Judge, Rajouri vide his order dated 05th August, 2011, impugned herein, held that the revisional jurisdiction can be exercised by a Court in a situation, where the decision impugned is grossly erroneous or patently illegal. The learned Magistrate here in this case, exercised the discretion in accordance with the settled norms of law and there is manifestly no error in the order nor has any illegality or impropriety been committed by the learned Magistrate and, therefore, no interference is warranted, as a result of which the learned Sessions Judge, Rajouri dismissed the Revision Petition. The petitioner did not find favour with order of the learned Sessions Judge, Rajouri. She assailed the said order before this Court in the instant petition filed u