Legal matter

The present appeal is filed by the appellant herein-a Medical Practitioner, being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order passed by the Additional Judicial Magistrate- of 2006 and confirmed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad on February 09, 2007 in Criminal Revision No. 366 of 2007. By the said orders, the courts below issued summons to the appellant for commission of offences punishable under Sections 304, 504 and 506, Indian Penal Code. 

Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the appellant herein is a Medical Practitioner. It is the case of respondent No. 2 - complainant, resident of Mathura that he is residing at the aforesaid place. That the father of the complainant had pain in his body. On July 04, 2001 at about 6.00 p.m., therefore, the complainant brought his father Buddha Ram to the clinic of the appellant herein for treatment. According to the complainant, treatment was given by the appellant who administered three injections to Buddha Ram. Within half an hour, Buddha Ram died. The appellant asked the complainant to remove the dead-body of Buddha Ram immediately and also threatened the complainant not to take any action against the appellant. 

It is the case of the complainant that he immediately went to Surir Police Station to lodge a report against the appellant but the police refused to register any case. He, therefore, filed a complaint in the Court of Additional Judicial Magistrate, Mathura on January 03, 2002. In the said complaint, the above facts had been stated by the complainant. A prayer was, therefore, made to take appropriate action against the appellant-doctor for offences punishable under Sections 304, 504 and 506, IPC. 

It was alleged that on July 04, 2001, the father of the complainant died because of negligence on the part of the appellant. It was also stated in the complaint that the complainant went to village Khaira on August 20, 2001. In the morning at about 8.00 a.m., the appellant-accused met the complainant and abused the complainant stating as to why he had filed a complaint against the appellant. According to the complainant, the appellant also took out a revolver and threatened the complainant to kill him unless he would withdraw the complaint. It was stated by the complainant that since the police refused to lodge report against the appellant, he was constrained to file the complaint. A prayer was, therefore, made to the Court to direct Police Station, Surir to register a complaint of the complainant, to take up investigation and take appropriate legal steps against the appellant. 

In the alternative, the learned counsel submitted that serious error of law has been committed by the Courts below in issuing process for commission of offences punishable under Sections 304, 504 and 506, IPC. It was submitted that so far as Sections 504 and 506, IPC are concerned, even the learned Magistrate has not stated anything as to why process for the aforesaid two sections should be issued. 

As to issuance of process under Section 304, IPC, the counsel submitted that even if it is assumed for the sake of argument that whatever is stated by the complainant is true, the appellant is a Doctor and it is well- established that in exercise of his professional conduct, no criminal liability can be imposed on him. The process under Section 304, therefore, deserves to be quashed. According to the learned counsel, at the most process could have been issued under Section 304A and not under Section 304, IPC. There can neither be intention (mens rea) nor `knowledge' on the part of the appellant that his act would result or likely to cause death of the patient. Hence, even if all the allegations are treated to be true, it is an act of negligence covered by Section 304A, IPC.