Karnataka High Court
Smt S Priyanka vs The State Of Karnataka on 20 February, 2023
Bench: K S Hemalekha
-1-
WP No. 24674 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA
WRIT PETITION NO. 24674 OF 2019 (GM-POLICE)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. S.PRIYANKA
W/O SIDDAIAH K
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
DOOR NO.787, GROUND FLOOR
'A' BLOCK, SAHAKARANAGAR
BENGALURU-560 092
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI DANAPPA P. PANIBHATE, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
HOME DEPARTMENT
VIDHANA SOUDHA
Digitally signed by BENGALURU-560 001
C K LATHA
Location: HIGH 2. THE POLICE SUB-INSPECTOR
COURT OF SADASHIVANAGAR POLICE STATION
KARNATAKA
BENGALURU-560 012
3. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE
INFANTRY ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001
4. M.S.RAMAIAH MEDICAL COLLEGE HOSPITAL
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN
DR. M.R.SEETHARAM, NEW BEL ROAD
BENGALURU-560 012
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI N.KUMAR, AGA FOR R1 TO R3;
SRI AMRUTHESH C., ADVOCATE FOR R4)
-2-
WP No. 24674 of 2019
THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH
ENDORSEMENT DATED 27.11.2018 ISSUED BY THE R-2 VIDE
ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN 'B' GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petitioner in this Writ Petition is seeking for a writ of
mandamus to quash the endorsement dated 27.11.2018 issued
by the 2nd respondent, whereby the 2nd respondent has stated
that the body of the deceased has already been handed over to
the petitioner and further investigation so far as conducting
post mortem would not arise.
2. The petitioner is also seeking a direction to
respondents No.1 to 3 to investigate the matter in respect of
Smt. Gowri S stating that the petitioner wants to know whether
the death of the petitioner's mother was natural or due to
medical negligence and also to take action against the 4th
respondent for keeping the dead body three days without
reason in the custody of the hospital.
3. The brief facts of the petition are that the mother of
the petitioner, one Mrs.Gowri S, aged about 60 years was
WP No. 24674 of 2019
admitted to M.S.Ramaiah Medical College Hospital-4th
respondent herein and the mother of the petitioner was
detected with lung infection and was in hospital from
13.10.2018 to 22.10.2018. The mother of the petitioner died
on 22.10.2018. The petition states that as the 4th respondent
did not hand over the dead body of the mother of the petitioner
due to non-payment of medical bill, the petitioner lodged a
complaint on 23.10.2018 before the 2nd respondent stating that
the decease-mother of the petitioner died due to medical
negligence and hence, post-mortem of the body is necessary
and to hand over the body to the petitioner and investigate the
matter. Since the police officer did not investigate the case, the
petitioner filed WP (HC) No.101/2018 before this Court seeking
direction to hand over the dead body of the deceased Gowri to
the petitioner and to investigate the matter.
4. The facts reveal that the said W.P.H.C.101/2018
came to be disposed of as having become infructuous since the
dead body of the deceased Smt. Gowri .S was handed over by
the police officer to the petitioner.
5. The grievance of the petitioner is that the 2nd
respondent issued an endorsement on 27.11.2018 stating that
WP No. 24674 of 2019
since already the dead body of the deceased Gowri S. has been
handed over to the petitioner, further investigation is not
necessary and the request of the petitioner for post-mortem
cannot be done. Aggrieved by which, the present writ petition
is filed.
6. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the 4th
respondent-Hospital has filed statement of objections inter-alia
contending that the petition filed is not maintainable as the
petitioner is alleging professional negligence against the doctors
of the 4th respondent-hospital, who had treated the mother of
the petitioner. The main objection of the 4th respondent is that
there is no medical negligence on the part of the doctors of the
4th respondent as sought in the writ petition. It is further stated
that on 22.10.2018 the patient developed bradycardia and
cardio pulmonary resuscitation was immediately initiated to the
petitioner and in spite of the best efforts, the patient could not
survived and was declared as dead on 22.10.2018 at about
8.25 p.m. It is further stated that the body was handed over to
the patient's family in spite of non-clearing the hospital charges
and even today, the petitioner is in due and separate dishonor
of cheque case against the petitioner for recovery of
WP No. 24674 of 2019
Rs.1,15,780/- is pending consideration. It is stated that as the
post mortem was not required, as the deceased had no criteria
which is mandatory for conducting the post mortem and the
death summary pertaining to the deceased was handed over to
the petitioner herein. It is stated that the allegations of the
petitioner that the post mortem was not conducted and the
cause of death was not informed to the petitioner is not
justifiable as the same was known to the petitioner in the death
summary, which contains all the report from the time of
admission till death.
7. Learned AGA has filed a memo along with the letter
dated 24.10.2018 of Sri Siddaiah Naidu, son-in-law of the
deceased, wherein it is mentioned that the body was handed
over to Siddaiah Naidu and that the post-mortem of
Smt. S. Gowri need not be carried. The said memo along with
the document is placed on record.
8. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner,
learned counsel for 4th respondent and the learned AGA for the
State, and perused the material on record.
WP No. 24674 of 2019
9. The perusal of the writ petition papers and the
material on record would reveal that the petitioner is alleging
negligence on the part of the doctors of the 4th respondent-
Hospital stating that proper care was not taken by the hospital
authorities and while releasing the dead body, post mortem of
the deceased was not conducted. The same has been strongly
and vehemently objected by the learned counsel appearing for
the 4th respondent and would contend that the medical
negligence as alleged by the petitioner could not be adjudicated
in a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
10. The allegations of medical negligence or deficiency
in service is without any material on record. The main issue
whether there is any negligence or not is a disputed question of
fact which this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India cannot look into as held by the catena of judgment laid
down by the Hon'ble Apex Court and by this Court. Moreover,
this is not a medico-legal case and the patient having died due
to natural medical causes, post mortem autopsy is not
necessary to determine the cause of death. The 4th respondent-
Hospital has also issued the death summary stating the cause
of death, which reads as under:
WP No. 24674 of 2019
"Cause of Death:
- Bronchopneumonia in Sepsis with Septic shock with
Multiorgan dysfunction syndrome and acute
respiratory distress syndrome.
- Right sided spontaneous pneumothorax status post
Intercostal drainage insertion."
12. For the reasons stated supra, the petitioner is not
entitled for the relief sought in the present petition and the
same needs to be dismissed.
13. Accordingly, this Court pass the following:
ORDER
The writ petition is dismissed as devoid of merits.
Sd/-
JUDGE
CKL
