IMPORTANT POINT
The court emphasized the requirement of gross negligence and high recklessness to fasten criminal liability on doctors.

JUDGMENT

1. This Criminal Petition is filed to quash all further proceedings in Crime.No.86 of 2014 dtd. 28/1/2014 on the file of Sanjeeva Reddy Nagar Police Station, Hyderabad.

2. The petitioners are arrayed as Accused Nos.1 and 2 in Crime No.86 of 2014 for the offence punishable under Sec. 338 of IPC. Basing on the complaint of the 2nd respondent, the Police have registered a case against the petitioners. The petitioners are Doctors by profession.

3. It is the case of the prosecution that the wife of the 2nd respondent aged about 36 years was suffering with 'hesterectomy' and 'hernia' and he consulted their family Doctors i.e., Dr.M.Srihari Rao and Dr.M.Radhika Rani i.e., petitioner Nos.1 and 2. On 20/5/2013, the 2nd respondent admitted his wife in Raghava Multi Specialty Hospital and got operated on 21/5/2013. In the middle of the operation, they arranged drain pipe but it fell down after few minutes. Though they tried to arrange it again, it could not be fixed and then their staff started pressing his wife's stomach, which got burst at operation place. Doctors requested the 2nd respondent not to complain about the same to any one and that they will cure the same. Immediately, the 2nd respondent shifted his wife to Osmania General Hospital for treatment but she could not recover. From there, on 8/6/2013, he again shifted his wife to Raja Nursing Home for treatment. For the above said negligence, the present complaint was filed by the 2nd respondent against the petitioners. As stated supra, basing on the said complaint, a case was registered against both the petitioners.

4. Heard Smt. M.Vidyavathi, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri S.Ganesh, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for 1st respondent and Sri V.Sreemanarayna learned counsel for the respondent No.2.

5. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that they are innocent of the offences alleged against them and they have been falsely implicated in the case and the ingredients of Sec. 338 Cr.P.C are not at all attracted. It is further contended that no case is made out in medical terminology and no oral or documentary evidence was enclosed in the complaint against the petitioners. It is further contended by the counsel that the allegations made by the 2nd respondent are general in nature, false and baseless. The 2nd respondent suppressed the facts by not stating the whole health condition of the patient before operation. Further, the 2nd respondent demanded the petitioners to pay Rs.2.00 lakhs and as the said amount was not paid by them, to pressurize and harass them, filed a false complaint against them and therefore, prayed to quash the complaint.

6. It is further contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the patient, who was the wife of the 2nd respondent was the patient of 1st petitioner while she was working in Vijayawada. The patient was suffering from obesity and overweight while she gave birth to one male baby a few years back. Thereafter, she consulted the 1st petitioner, who was a good Gynecologist for the 2nd issue in the initial stage itself and accordingly, the 1st petitioner gave good treatment to her for nine months and the wife of the 2nd respondent gave birth to a healthy baby. Thereafter, the 1st petitioner got transferred to MNJ Cancer Hospital. After eight years, the 2nd respondent consulted the 1st petitioner asking her to do operation of 'Hysterectomy and Abdominal Hernia for Mesh Repair'. When the wife of the 2nd respondent approached the 1st petitioner for the said operation, she was overweight i.e., above 90 kgs and the 1st petitioner counselled her patient about the complications intra and post operative period. Accepting the said risk, they gave consent for surgery. The 1st and 2nd petitioners are qualified Doctors and performed many surgeries successfully for the past fifteen years. In order to help the family of the 2nd respondent, the petitioners suggested them to select a Hospital to do operation.