SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Raj) 65

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
Vinod Shaily & Anr. v State of Rajasthan & Anr and other connected matters



HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 7844/2024

1. Vinod Shaily S/o Late Shri Purshottam Shaily, Aged About

59 Years, General And Endoscopic Surgeon At Vasundhara Hospital, 11 Sector, C.h.b. Jodhpur.

2. Jitendra Khetawat S/o Shri Bhanwar Lal Khetawat, Aged About 42 Years, Anaesthetist And Critical Care Consultant At Vasundhara Hospital, 11 Sector, C.h.b. Jodhpur.

----Petitioners Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

2. Sahiram Bishnoi S/o Nathuram, R/o A225, Saraswati Nagar, Basni, Jodhpur (Rajasthan)

----Respondents Connected With S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 7770/2024

1. Sanjay Makwana S/o Mr. Sudhakar Makwana, Aged About

60 Years, Vasundhara Hospital, Sector 11, Chopasni Housing Board, Jodhpur, 342008.

2. Dr. Renu Makwana W/o Dr. Sanjay Makwana, Aged About

58 Years, Vasundhara Hospital, Sector 11, Chopasni Housing Board, Jodhpur, 342008.

----Petitioners Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

2. Sahiram Bishnoi S/o Nathuram, A 225, Saraswati Nagar, Basni, Jodhpur, Distt. Jodhpur (Raj.)

----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Dhirender Singh, Sr. Advocate assisted by Ms. Priyanka Borana Mr. Muktesh Maheshwari Ms. Vandana Bhansali For Respondent(s) : Mr. Deepak Chaoudhary,AAG Mr. Vikram Singh Rajpurohit,Dy.G.A.

Mr. Naman Mohnot HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

Order

Reportable ORDER PRONOUNCED ON ::: 05/05/2025 ORDER RESERVED ON ::: 07/04/2025

1. By way of filing these instant criminal misc. petitions under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, the petitioners seek quashing of F.I.R. No. 388/2024 registered at Police Station Chopasni Housing Board, District Jodhpur on 25.10.2024 for the alleged offence under Section 105 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and all consequential/subsequent proceedings arising therefrom.

2. The foundational facts as alleged in the First Information Report (FIR) are as follows:

The complainant, alleges grave medical negligence in relation to the treatment administered to his daughter-in- law, Mrs. Priyanka Bishnoi, who was admitted to Vasundhara Hospital on 05.09.2024 for a minor uterine fibroid surgery. It is claimed that she was assured of the simplicity of the procedure, and shortly after admission, without comprehensive diagnostic work-up or pre-operative preparedness, she was rushed into surgery involving hysteroscopy, laparoscopy, and trans-cervical resection of myoma. The complainant contends that essential pre-

surgical protocols, including the INR (International Normalized Ratio) test, were not conducted. Post-operatively, the patient’s condition reportedly deteriorated rapidly, with persistent unconsciousness, yet she was transferred to a general ward without requisite neurological assessment or CT brain imaging. The attending medical staff allegedly downplayed the gravity of her condition and attributed her non-responsiveness to minor cerebral inflammation without diagnostic confirmation. Despite signs of severe hemorrhage and administration of multiple blood transfusions, the hospital allegedly continued to misrepresent her clinical condition as stable. On 07.09.2024, when her condition worsened further, she was referred to Marengo CIMS Hospital, Ahmedabad. There, clinicians immediately diagnosed her with critical intracranial hemorrhage— confirmed via CT scan—and opined that prior failure to undertake such imaging and timely intervention constituted a breach of medical protocol. A report by a committee constituted under the District Collector’s order revealed stark inconsistencies between the hospital’s version and that of the patient’s attendants. The committee also recorded that the patient suffered from post-operative sepsis, MODS (Multiple Organ Dysfunction Syndrome), and DIC (Disseminated Intravascular Coagulation), none of which were promptly or appropriately addressed. It also highlighted the failure to conduct a CT brain scan despite neurologists recommending it, terming it a serious clinical lapse.

Further, the complainant asserts that the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top