Back
SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
Nirmal Drolia @ Nirmal Kumar Drolia – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Both the cases are arising out of same complaint case as well as the order taking cognizance that is why both the cases are heard together.
2. Heard Mr. Ankit Kumar and Mr. Ajay Kumar Sah, the learned counsels for the petitioners, Mr. Keshri, the learned counsel for the respondent State and Mr. J.N. Upadhyay, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the O.P.No.2.
3. These petitions have been filed for quashing of the entire criminal proceedings pertaining to C.P.Case No.2528 of 2014 including the order taking cognizance dated 30.06.2017 whereby the learned court has been pleased to take cognizance under section 304A IPC, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Dhanbad.
4. The complaint case has been filed alleging therein that the O.P.No.2 is the son of the deceased Ramesh Kumar Chopra. It is alleged that the patient was taken to Patliputra Nursing Home and admitted there on 20.09.2014 at about 3.00 p.m. and paid registration fees of Rs.50/-. It is alleged that the accused no.1 and the petitioner diagnosed the patient and they induced the patient attendant to deposit Rs.20,000/- however only Rs.1000/- was deposited. In the evening, again furth
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....
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....
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....
Cognizance of medical negligence cannot proceed without prima facie expert opinion as per established legal standards, emphasizing the need for significant evidence to substantiate claims of gross ne....
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....
Medical professionals cannot be prosecuted for negligence unless there is gross negligence established through expert opinion; mere errors or lack of consent do not suffice.
The court emphasized the requirement of gross negligence and high recklessness to fasten criminal liability on doctors.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of 'gross negligence' to establish an offence under Section 304A of the Indian Penal Code in cases of medical malpractice.
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
