Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
MRS. MANJU RANI CHAUHAN, J.
Dr. Neeraj Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. and Another – Respondent
APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 39316 of 2023
Decided on : 12-05-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. application filed to quash charge-sheet and proceedings. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. previous court orders and proceedings discussed. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. further court orders and adjournments noted. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. incident details and medical board's report. (Para 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 5. fir registered and challenged in court. (Para 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 6. arguments presented by applicant's counsel. (Para 19 , 20) |
| 7. court's analysis of previous judgments and legal standards. (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25) |
| 8. court's opinion on procedural legality. (Para 26 , 27 , 28) |
| 9. discussion on admissibility of statements. (Para 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33) |
| 10. clarification on evidentiary value of conduct. (Para 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38) |
| 11. legal framework on prosecution and conduct. (Para 39 , 40 , 41 , 42) |
| 12. discussion on evidence and its admissibility. (Para 43 , 44 , 45) |
| 13. court's interpretation of negligence standards. (Para 46 , 47 , 48 , 49) |
| 14. clarification on medical negligence definitions. (Para 50 , 51 , 52) |
| 15. court's stance on criminal liability for negligence. (Para 53 , 54 , 55 , 56) |
| 16. assessment of standard of care expected from medical practitioners. (Para 57 , 58 , 59 , 60) |
| 17. court's final assessment of evidence and arguments. (Para 61 , 62 , 63) |
| 18. final observations on the merits of the case. (Para 64 , 65 , 66 , 67 , 68) |
| 19. charge sheet and proceedings quashed. (Para 69) |
| 20. conclusion and order issued by the court. (Para 70 , 71) |
1. Mr. G.S. Chaturvedi, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Vishal Kashyap and Mr. Shekhar Chaudhary, learned counsels appeared to represent the applicants, Mr. Anuruddha Chaturvedi and Mr. Dinesh Kumar Sharma, learned counsels appeared for the opposite party no.2 and Mr. Amit Singh Chauhan, learned AGA-I for the State. Perused the record.
2. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the charge-sheet No.593 of 2023, dated 25.08.2023 and cognizance/summoning order dated 19.09.2023 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.7991 of 2023 (State vs. Dr. Neeraj Kumar), arising out of Case Crime No.376 of 2023, under Sections 304 IPC, Police Station-Khurja Nagar, District-Bulandshahar, pending before the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bulandshahar.
3. Earlier on 27.10.2023, the present application under Section 482 CrPC was disposed of, wherein a direction was given to the applicant to surrender before the court concerned within a period of one month from that date and apply for bail, which was to be decided expeditiously by the court below, in accordance with law.
4. It appears that the applicant filed anticipatory bail application No.1431 of 2024 in which some order dated 29.02.2024 was passed. A recall application No.3 of 2023 was filed for recalling the order dated 27.10.2023 in which, on 12.03.2024, the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court passed the following order:-
“Ref:- Criminal Misc. Recall Application No. 3 of 2023
1. Vide order dated 29.02.2024 the coordinate Bench was passed the order. Para 9 of the order is quoted below:-
"9. Connect with Criminal Misc. Application 482 No. 39316 of 2023 (Dr. Neeraj Kumar Vs. State of U.P. and another) and place the matter before Hon'ble The Chief Justice for nominating a Bench to hear both the matters and list, if possible, on 06.03.2024 before the appropriate Bench."
2. Office is directed to place the record before Hon'ble the Chief Justice for nomination in pursuance of the order dated 29.02.2024l. As par perusal of record there is no nomination by Hon'ble the Chief Justice.
3. This Court is of the view that Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 1431 of 2024 moved on behalf of the applicant should be heard by the Court having jurisdiction and Application U/s. 482 No. - 39316 of 2023 is on different cause in which recall application is pending.
4. Since counsel for 482 application who has moved recall application is not present, the case is passed over and for hearing of Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Applic
AI
Criminal liability for medical negligence requires proof of gross negligence; mere errors in judgment do not suffice for prosecution under IPC.
To establish criminal negligence against medical professionals, evidence of gross negligence is essential. Mere errors in judgment are insufficient for prosecution.
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.
For criminal liability under Section 304-A IPC, gross negligence or recklessness must be established, along with a violation of duty by the medical professional, necessitating a trial.
Criminal liability under IPC 304-A for medical negligence requires prima facie gross negligence by ordinary competent doctor standard; no prosecution without material proving rash act, as simple erro....
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....
A negative final report does not bar further investigation and prosecution in cases of medical negligence requires substantial expert evidence.
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
