Gujarat High Court
Daynaben D/O Vajubhai Ajudiya W/O Malay ... vs State Of Gujarat on 18 September, 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/18175/2024 ORDER DATED: 18/09/2024
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 18175
of 2024
==========================================================
DAYNABEN D/O VAJUBHAI AJUDIYA W/O MALAY SUVAGIYA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR MEET D PANSURIA(10170) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR UTKARSH SHARMA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY
Date : 18/09/2024
ORAL ORDER
1. By way of the present application under Section 482 of
the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), the applicant-
accused has prayed for enlarging the Applicant on anticipatory
bail in connection with the FIR be i ng C. R.
No . 1 1 2 0 3 0 2 4 2 4 0 5 5 9 of 2024 registered wit h 'B'
Division Junagadh Police Station, Junagadh for the offe nce s
puni sha bl e unde r S ec tions 304, 308, 114 of the Indian Penal
Code.
2. Heard learned Advocate Mr.Meet D. Pansuria for the
applicant and learned APP Mr.Utkarsh Sharma appearing on
behalf of the Respondent - State.
3. Learned advocate for the applicant submitted that the
present applicant is a lady and is a practicing Doctor who had
performed cesarean over the wife of the first informant in the
month of May, 2023. Thereafter, since she was facing pain in
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/18175/2024 ORDER DATED: 18/09/2024
undefined
her abdomen area, she was again brought to hospital of the
applicant where she was treated as an outdoor patient. Again,
after few days, the deceased felt some discomfort and
therefore, she was taken to another hospital and thereafter she
was advised to be taken to a higher centre and while she was
being shifted to Rajkot, the deceased had expired on 13.9.2023.
Thus, it was not immediately after the performance of C-section
over the deceased in the hospital of the present applicant that
she had expired. She had also taken treatment in several other
hospitals during the said period and had died because of some
post operative complications.
3.1 He submitted that the prosecution had cited four other
patients, wherein one female patient had died after cesarean
being performed upon them in the hospital of the present
applicant and other patients were suffering from acute kidney
infection after performing cesarean in the hospital of the
applicant. The cause of death of the wife of the first informant
and the other four cases cannot be equated with each other.
The deaths of another female patient cannot be termed as
maternal mortality as the same has not taken place within a
period of 42 days from the date of cesarean being performed
upon them.
3.2 He submitted that the present FIR has been lodged
against the present applicant after the receipt of the report of
the Special Investigation Team which had been formed by the
Additional Director, Health and Family Welfare. Actually, the
inquiry conducted by the said committee was supposed to be a
confidential affair and the report of the said committee ought
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/18175/2024 ORDER DATED: 18/09/2024
undefined
not to have made available to the police authorities. However,
for the reasons best known to the said committee and the police
authorities, the said report was submitted to the police
authorities and on the basis of the said report, the present FIR
has been lodged.
3.3 He submitted that the guidelines issued by the Hon'ble
Apex Court in various judgments have been violated by the
prosecuting agency while registering the present FIR. He
submitted that even if the case of prosecution is accepted at its
face value, an offence punishable under Section 304A of the
Indian Penal Code is made out against the present applicant
and by no stretch of imagination, the applicant could be said to
have committed an offence punishable under Section 304 of the
IPC. He, therefore, submitted to allow the present application
and enlarge the present applicant on anticipatory bail subject to
suitable conditions.
3.4 Learned advocate for the applicant relied upon the
judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of one
Mahadev Prasad Kaushik Vs. State of U.P. and Anr.
[(2008)14 SCR 660] in support of his submissions.
4. The application is opposed by learned APP for the
respondent State. He submitted that the present applicant was
working as a gynecologist in the hospital named Health Plus
Hospital at Junagadh and while working as such, the applicant
had performed several C-section operations upon various female
patients. Out of them, two persons including the wife of the first
informant had died and several other patients had suffered acute
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/18175/2024 ORDER DATED: 18/09/2024
undefined
kidney infection. He submitted that the report of the Special
Investigation Team dated 6.2.2024 indicates that the hospital
was found lacking on several aspects which had resulted into the
death of two patients and several others having suffered other
health hazards. He therefore submitted to dismiss the present
application.
5. This Court has considered the submissions canvassed by
learned advocates for the parties and has also perused the
material placed on record. As per the case of prosecution, the
wife of the first informant was carrying pregnancy and was
admitted to the hospital namely Health Plus Hospital at
Junagadh for delivery. The present applicant was treating the
wife of the first informant and had advised cesarean operation to
be performed upon her and accordingly, cesarean was
performed upon her and a girl child was born. Thereafter, she
was discharged from the hospital and after few days, she started
feeling acute pain in the abdomen area and again she was taken
to the hospital of the present applicant and the applicant had
informed her husband i.e. first informant that there was water
retention in the stitches which were taken at the time of
performance of the cesarean operation. Again, after few days,
the deceased started feeling some discomfort, because of which
she was taken to the hospital of the present applicant where she
was not available, therefore the deceased was taken to the Civil
Hospital, Junagadh where her health deteriorated further.
Thereafter, she was shifted to a private hospital and accordingly,
she was shifted to one K.J. Multispeciality Hospital, Junagadh,
where she was admitted in ICU and since there also the
condition of the deceased was deteriorating, she was advised to
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/18175/2024 ORDER DATED: 18/09/2024
undefined
be shifted to the higher centre and therefore, she was being
taken to Rajkot and she had died while being in transit.
5.1 While she was admitted to K.J. Multispeciality Hospital, it
had come to the notice of the first informant that several other
patients were also admitted to said K.J. Multispeciality Hospital,
who had taken treatment at the hands of the present applicant
and there were some complications because of the said
treatment. Out of them one, Harshitaben Balas had also
undergone cesarean operation at the hands of the present
applicant and she had also died subsequently. The other patients
namely, Truptiben, Monikaben had also undergone cesarean
operation at the hospital of the present applicant and after the
said cesarean operation, they were suffering from kidney failure.
5.2 The record further indicates that there were 37 other
patients who had taken similar treatment in the Health Plus
Hospital, at Junagadh at the hands of the present applicant and
out of them 10 were subsequently facing acute kidney failure
because of the said treatment.
5.3 The first informant and the relatives of the other victims
had lodged a complaint in this regard with the District Health
Administration of Junagadh district. On the basis of the same, a
Special Investigation Team was constituted to look into the
matter. The said SIT had carried out investigation at the Health
Plus Hospital at Junagadh and it was found that the infection
with which the patients were suffering appeared to be hospital
Acquired Infection. Despite being a multispeciality hospital, the
opinion of the Physician was not obtained as regards the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/18175/2024 ORDER DATED: 18/09/2024
undefined
preoperative assessment and postoperative complications. The
investigation revealed that out of the aforesaid patients, one
patient was having Blood Pressure of 90/60 mmHg and despite
the same, she was administered injection Lasix. In case of
another patient, though her respiratory track was clear, she was
administered nebuliser. The investigation further revealed that
these patients were administered injection Mikacin 250 Mg. The
said injection Mikacin is reported to be injurious to kidney. The
record also indicates that the I.V Fluid, which was administered
to the patients was found to be containing bacterial endotoxin.
Upon perusal of the said report it appears that it was because of
these shortcomings, the complications had arisen in the patients
who had taken treatment at the said hospital which had proved
to be fatal for two patients and the other patients had suffered
kidney ailment because of the same.
5.4 It is sought to be contended on behalf of the applicant that
what is made out against the present applicant is an offence
punishable under Section 304A of the Indian Penal Code and not
the offence punishable under Section 304 of the IPC. Even if this
argument is accepted to be true, the fact remains that two
patients have died premature deaths because of the negligence
on part of the present applicant and several others were stated
to be suffering from life threatening kidney disease.
6. Considering all these aspects, no case is made out to
exercise discretion in favour of the applicant. Accordingly, the
present Application is dismissed.
(M. R. MENGDEY,J)
Manshi
