Back
SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
Vijay Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Heard Mr. Pandey Neeraj Rai, assisted by Mr. Rohit Ranjan Sinha and Mr. Saurabh Sagar, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Bishambhar Shastri learned counsel for the State and Mr. Ashish Jha, learned counsel for the O.P. No.2.
2. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed for quashing of entire criminal proceeding including order taking cognizance dated 16.08.2010 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sahibganj in connection with P.C.R. Case No. 189 of 2009 whereby cognizance has been taken under section 304-A/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Prayer has also been made for quashing of order dated 23.01.2013, passed by the learned Sessions Judge-I, Sahibganj in Criminal Revision No. 83 of 2010 whereby the Criminal Revision No. 83 of 2010 has been dismissed as not maintainable, pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sahibganj.
3. P.C.R. Case No. 189 of 2009 has been filed by the O.P. No. 2 in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sahibganj alleging therein that on 10.08.2009 at 9 A.M. the complainant brought his father to Surya Nursing Home, Sahibganj for operation of Hernia and the petitioner told him that the operation will b
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for expert opinion before initiating criminal proceedings against doctors and the potential abuse of process of law in cases of ....
The need for a credible opinion from another competent doctor to support the charge of negligence before entertaining a private complaint against a doctor and the inability to fasten vicarious liabil....
Competent medical opinion is necessary in cases of medical negligence, and the court emphasized the need for care and caution in the interest of society when prosecuting doctors for offenses of crimi....
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.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the necessity of a preliminary inquiry into allegations of medical negligence, the requirement for prima facie evidence before entertaining a priva....
For criminal liability under Section 304-A IPC in cases of medical negligence, there must be gross negligence proven by credible medical evidence; mere allegations without such evidence are insuffici....
Medical professionals can only be held criminally liable for negligence if gross negligence is established. The presence of a co-accused in a procedure does not automatically imply responsibility wit....
The court emphasized the requirement of gross negligence and high recklessness to fasten criminal liability on doctors.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
