Delhi District Court
State vs . 1). Dhananjay Kumar on 20 July, 2016
IN THE COURT OF ASJ - 03 NORTH ROHINI COURTS : DELHI
Sessions Case No:58292/16
FIR No. : 589/2008
U/s : 304/304A/34 IPC
& 27 DMC Act
P.S. : Sultan Puri
State Vs. 1). Dhananjay Kumar
S/o Sh. Pardumin
Kushwaha
R/o A-546, Vats Sharda
Enclave, Prem Nagar-III,
Delhi.
2). Sh. Vinod Gupta
S/o Sh. Banwari Lal
R/o G-113, Pushkar
Enclave, Paschim Vihar,
New Delhi.
Offence complained of : 304/304A/34 IPC
Plea of accused : Pleaded not guilty
Final Order : Acquitted
Date of committal : 31.01.2009
Date of reserving the order : 25.05.2016
Date of Judgment : 20.07.2016
J U D G M E N T:
1. On 03.05.2006, Radhey Shyam has to go for duty at 8.00 a.m. but suddenly got ill and suffered loose motion and vomiting. His wife Savitri Devi called Dr. Dhananjay from Pooja Clinic to her SC No: 58292/16 FIR No: 589/2008 PS: Sultan Puri State Vs. Dhananjay etc. Page 1 of 22 house. Dr. Dhananjay took Radhey Shyam to his clinic and gave him treatment. But as the condition deteriorated, Dr. Dhananjay Kumar Maurya took him to Nursing Home Manthan. There treatment was given by Dr. Vinod and other doctors of Manthan Nursing Home. When they also could not control then they left the Nursing Home in the van of Nursing Home to Deen Dayal Hospital. On the way, they dropped Radhey Shyam and Savitri at Rajdhani Park, Nangloi on the pretext of bringing some money. From there, Savitri hired three wheeler and reached Deen Dayal Hospital where doctors declared Radhey Shyam brought dead. Postmortem on the dead body was conducted. A complaint was also sent to Medical Council. The doctor opined that the cause of death is asphyxia consequential to laryngeal oedema. It was also opined that the postmortem findings was suggestive of anaphylactic reaction. The viscera was also sent to FSL for analysis but no specific drug/poison was detected according to the report.
2. Police after completion of investigation filed the charge sheet for the offence u/s. 304 IPC. Ld. MM after complying with provisions of section 207 Cr.PC committed the case to Sessions Court as offence punishable u/s 304 IPC is exclusively triable by the Sessions Court.
3. Accused Dr. Vinod Gupta was charged for the offence u/s. 304-A SC No: 58292/16 FIR No: 589/2008 PS: Sultan Puri State Vs. Dhananjay etc. Page 2 of 22 and accused Dhananjay Kumar who was found to be not having any degree authorising to practice as a medical practitioner was charged for the offence punishable u/s. 304 IPC and Section 27 of Delhi Medical Council Act, 1997. Both the accused persons pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. Thereafter, the case was fixed for prosecution evidence.
4. Prosecution in order to prove its case examined 23 witnesses.
5. Sh. Tilak Dhari Prajapati was examined as PW-1. He is witness of hearsay so far as the incident is concerned. On 11.05.06, he identified the dead body of deceased Radhey Shyam, his son in the Mortuary of DDU Hospital vide document Ex.PW1/A. He also received the dead body vide Ex.PW1/B.
6. Smt. Savitri Devi, the complainant was examined as PW-2. She deposed that her husband was suffering from vomiting and lose motion. She took him to Manthan Hospital in the morning at about 8.00 a.m. Her husband was admitted there for about two- three hours. Dr. Vinod and Ram Niwas asked her to go outside whenever she went in the room to see her husband. She identified Dr. Vinod as the person who treated her husband. Suraj Bhan reached there and he remained in the hospital when this witness had gone to home to see her children. She stated that she does not know as to what treatment was given to her husband in the hospital. She stated that without informing her, SC No: 58292/16 FIR No: 589/2008 PS: Sultan Puri State Vs. Dhananjay etc. Page 3 of 22 her husband was removed from said hospital. Thereafter, he was left unattended. She deposed that at that time besides driver, Dr. Vinod, one neighbour and her husband were in the vehicle. Dr. Vinod left unattended her husband by saying that he has to bring some money but he did not return. Dr. Vinod deliberately and intentionally left her husband unattended in order to save himself. She stated that Dr. Vinod had cheated her as her husband had already died at his hospital and on pretext he took her husband to DDU Hospital for further treatment. She stated that she took her husband to DDU Hospital where doctor declared him brought dead. She did not meet the police in DDU Hospital. She stated that she did not get the police case registered.
7. Ld. Addl. PP cross-examined her and shown her complaint Ex.PW1/A but she stated that she cannot say if it bears her thumb impression. She also denied the suggestion that she produced the prescription slip given by accused Dhananjay regarding treatment to her husband.
8. During cross-examination by Ld. Counsel for accused Dhananjay she stated that she took her husband to Manthan Hospital for treatment. She had not seen accused Dhananjay in Manthan Hospital nor he had given any treatment to her husband. She admitted that accused Dhananjay had not treated her husband and that there is no fault of Dhananjay in the death of her SC No: 58292/16 FIR No: 589/2008 PS: Sultan Puri State Vs. Dhananjay etc. Page 4 of 22 husband. She also admitted that Dhananjay has been falsely implicated.
9. During the cross-examination on behalf of accused Dr. Vinod Kumar Gupta, she stated that she did not tell in her statement to police that she took her husband to Manthan Hospital in the morning at about 8.00 a.m. and also did not disclose that her husband was admitted at Manthan Hospital where he was admitted for three four hours and that accused Vinod Gupta and Ram Niwas asked her to go outside whenever she wanted to see her husband. Her Devar Suraj Bhan reached Manthan Hospital in the evening at about 3.00 p.m. but she again stated that Suraj Bhan reached DDU Hospital directly and not at Manthan Hospital. She never told the police that her husband was removed from hospital without telling her or that on the way to DDU Hospital, her husband was left unattended. She also did not tell the police that on the way to DDU Hospital, Dr. Vinod and one of the neighbours were also there besides the driver. She also did not tell the police that Dr. Vinod Gupta left her unattended on the pretext that he is going to bring some money and thereafter he did not return. She admitted that she never disclosed to the police that Dr. Vinod deliberately and intentionally left her husband unattended in order to save himself. She also stated that "I have identified the accused Vinod Gupta today in the court SC No: 58292/16 FIR No: 589/2008 PS: Sultan Puri State Vs. Dhananjay etc. Page 5 of 22 because he had not paid any money to her. Vol.: I had not demanded any money".
10. After the cross-examination ld. Addl. PP requested for re-
examination of the witness which was allowed wherein she admitted that on 03.05.06, she had taken her husband to Dr. Dhananjay who treated him first but she denied the suggestion that Dr. Dhananjay was with her when she took her husband to Manthan Hospital. She denied the suggestion that Dr. Dhananjay administered injunction to her husband as a result of which her husband later on died.
11. Suraj Bhan was examined as PW-3. He stated that on 03.05.16 his brother Radhey Shyam died due to negligency of Dr. vinod Gupta and Ram Niwas. Dr. Vinod Gupta and Ram Niwas went away by saying that they are bringing money and did not return. From there they took Radhey Shyam to DDU Hospital where doctor declared him brought dead. He stated that he along with Shiv Lal, neighbour took his brother to DDU Hospital. One of his neighbour told him that his brother is suffering from vomiting and loose motion. He went to Manthan Hospital, Sharda Vats Enclave, Sukhi Nagar, Prem Nagar. From Manthan Hospital, he along with his brother, Shiv Lal, Dr. Vinod Gupta, Ram Niwas (driver) went to DDU Hospital from Rajdhani Park.
12. He was cross-examined by ld. Addl. PP and he stated that he can SC No: 58292/16 FIR No: 589/2008 PS: Sultan Puri State Vs. Dhananjay etc. Page 6 of 22 identify Ram Niwas who met him at Manthan Hospital. Ram Niwas told him that the condition of his brother is serious and asked him to take his brother to DDU Hospital. At that time, he along with Shiv Lal and his babhi Savitri Devi were present in the hospital. Ram Niwas had talked with him at the gate of the hospital. He claimed to be the proprietor of the hospital. This witness also met Dhananjay in the hospital. He denied the suggestion that his nephew informed him that Radhey Shyam is in critical condition due to wrong injunction given by Dhananjay Kumar. He admitted that his Babhi had accompanied them to DDU Hospital.
13. During the cross-examination for accused Dhananjay he stated that his nephew informed him about the ill health of his brother and on this he reached Manthan Hospital at about 5.30 p.m. He met his brother and his condition was serious. At that time, he was under the treatment of Dr. Vinod Gupta and Ram Niwas. Dr. Dhananjay was also present there but he did not give treatment to his brother. Dr. Vinod Gupta and Ram Niwas took his brother in their vehicle to Rajdhani Park bus stand and left them there on the pretext that they are going to bring some money and thereafter they did not return. He also admitted the suggestion that accused has been falsely implicated.
14. During the cross-examination on behalf of Dr. Vinod Kumar SC No: 58292/16 FIR No: 589/2008 PS: Sultan Puri State Vs. Dhananjay etc. Page 7 of 22 Gupta, he stated that he never disclosed to the police that his brother died due to negligency of Dr. Vinod Gupta and Ram Niwas or that Vinod Gupta and Ram Niwas went away saying that they are brining money and thereafter did not return. He does not know as to how his brother expired and only doctor can tell about this. He was not aware about illness of his brother till 5.30 p.m. He remained in Manthan Hospital for 15 to 20 minutes. His Babhi had already left Manthan Hospital to see her children before this witness reached there. He did not meet any doctor in the hospital nor does he know the names of the doctors who treated his brother. He volunteered that later on police told him names of the doctors who treated his brother. His brother was not treated in any other hospital prior to the treatment in Manthan Hospital. He was also re-examined by ld. Addl. PP wherein he denied the suggestion that he is deposing falsely with respect to accused Dhananjay.
15. Ram Niwas was examined as PW-4. He deposed that during the period from 2003 to 2008, Manthan Hospital was being run under his supervision and control. On 03.05.06 at about 4.30 p.m. he received telephone of Dr. Dhananjay Kumar Maurya about one patient Radhey Shyam. He immediately contacted Dr. Vinod Gupta, the regular consultant of the hospital. After about 15 minutes, Radhey Shyam was brought by his wife and two three SC No: 58292/16 FIR No: 589/2008 PS: Sultan Puri State Vs. Dhananjay etc. Page 8 of 22 neighbours in rehri rikshaw in hospital. Dr. Vinod Gupta examined the patient and administered two injections. Prescription slip was prepared, copy of which is Ex.PW4/A and having his signatures and seal of Dr. Vinod Gupta at point A. He identified the handwriting and signatures of Dr. Vinod Gupta as he had seen him writing and signing during the duty in the hospital. The patient was referred to DDU Hospital. As there was no transport, so, the patient was taken in his van. Along with the patient, two more attendants, Dr. Dhananjay Kumar Maurya accompanied. As the attendant of the patient arranged one TSR to go to DDU Hospital, therefore, van returned after the patient was shifted in the TSR. Radhey Shyam was not admitted in the hospital.
16. During the cross-examination by counsel for accused Dhananjay, he stated that only the concerned doctor enquired about the ailment and previous treatment. He was confronted with his previous statement where it is not mentioned that accused Dhananjay told about the patient Radhey Shyam. He admitted that he has no personal knowledge of the referral order vide which patient was referred to DDU Hospital. He denied the suggestion that patient Radhey Shyam was admitted in the hospital before referring him to DDU Hospital. He denied the suggestion that Radhey Shyam was given treatment in the SC No: 58292/16 FIR No: 589/2008 PS: Sultan Puri State Vs. Dhananjay etc. Page 9 of 22 hospital.
17. During the cross-examination for accused Vinod Gupta, the witness stated that his hospital is not registered. He was present in the hospital when patient Radhey Shyam was brought. Radhey Shyam remained in the hospital for about 15-20 minutes. There is no written contract between him and Dr. Vinod Gupta regarding Vinod Gupta visiting his hospital. He denied the suggestion that Dr. Vinod Gupta did not visit his hospital on 03.05.06 and did not provide any treatment to patient Radhey Shyam or did not administer any injunction to Radhey Shyam.
18. Ravinder Prasad Gupta was examined as PW-5. He is running the Chemist Shop in the name and style of Gupta Medical Store at 83-A, Vats Enclave, Sukhi Nagar, Prem Nagar-III, Sultan Puri. He did not support the case and stated that he is not aware if Savitri came to his shop and purchased any medicine. He was cross-examined by ld. Addl. PP. He denied the suggestion that he provided blank prescription slip to Mr. Dhananjay. He also denied the suggestion that on 03.05.06 at about 9.00 a.m. Savitri came to his shop and presented the prescription slip prepared by Dr. Dhananjay or purchase three tablets of Althrosin 250 mg or he delivered the tablets to her. He also denied the suggestion that later on he came to know that husband of Savitri had died due to negligency of Dr. Dhananjay. The testimony of this witness SC No: 58292/16 FIR No: 589/2008 PS: Sultan Puri State Vs. Dhananjay etc. Page 10 of 22 remained unchallenged and uncontroverted.
19. HC Ramesh Kumar was examined as PW-6. He deposed that on 26.02.07 he was posted at PS Sultan Puri and was working as MHC (M). He proved entry in register no. 19 as Ex.PW6/A. Nothing material came in his lengthy cross-examination.
20. Ct. Ratibhan was examined as PW-7. On 26.02.07 he took the sealed parcels from MHC (M) and deposited the same in CFSL, Kolkota. In his cross-examination, nothing material favouring the defence came on record.
21. HC Rajkumar was examined as PW-8. He deposed that on 28.02.08, he joined the investigation with Inspector Yashpal. On that day, accused Dhananjay was arrested from his house A-546, Vats Sharda Enclave, Prem Nagar-III at about 7.00 p.m. vide arrest memo Ex.PW8/A. His personal search was conducted vide Ex.PW8/B. Accused made disclosure statement Ex.PW8/C. During the cross-examination, he denied the suggestion that accused himself came to police station Sultan Puri to join the investigation. He was illegally detained or that he was wrongly shown as arrested. He denied the suggestion that accused did not make any disclosure statement.
22. Dr. Girish Tyagi, Secretary, Delhi Medical Council was examined as PW-9. He was the Convener of the Disciplinary Committee of Delhi Medical Council. The Disciplinary Committee on the SC No: 58292/16 FIR No: 589/2008 PS: Sultan Puri State Vs. Dhananjay etc. Page 11 of 22 complaint forwarded by Medical Council of India made enquiries and concluded proceedings on 05.02.08. The order was issued on 31.03.08. Same is Ex.PW9/A (running into five pages) having signatures at point A and B. During the cross-examination, he denied the suggestion that no such statement of any person was recorded by members of the Disciplinary Committee or that he only signed Ex.PW9/A of his own or that the report was prepared in verbatim as per letter received from Delhi Medical Council or Medical Council of India.
23. During the cross-examination on behalf of accused Vinod Gupta, he stated that if a patient suffers from anaphylactic reaction, the patient can die immediately or after some gap of period or he can fully survive if treated properly. He also stated that every qualified doctor who is practicing in Allopathy medical system is eligible to comment on anaphylactic reaction.
24. HC Suresh was examined as PW-10. On 11.05.06 he was posted at police post Prem Nagar, PS Sultan Puri. On that day, he accompanied ASI Krishan Kumar to DDU Hospital. In the Mortuary of DDU Hospital, they found the dead body of Radhey Shyam identified by Tilakdhari Prajapati and Suraj Bhan. ASI Krishan Kumar recorded their statement, prepared inquest proceedings and thereafter, dead body was shifted to Subzi Mandi mortuary. The postmortem was conducted. After SC No: 58292/16 FIR No: 589/2008 PS: Sultan Puri State Vs. Dhananjay etc. Page 12 of 22 postmortem doctor handed over seven pulandas duly sealed with the seal of AKJ, Subzi Mandi Mortuary and one sample seal. These pulandas were seized vide memo Ex.PW10/A. Nothing material came during the cross-examination on record.
25. Ct. Pawan Kumar was examined as PW-11. On 10.09.08, he joined the investigation with Inspector Yashpal and went to Park Hospital, Meera Enclave near Kesho Pur Depot where Vinod Gupta was arrested vide Ex.PW11/A. His personal search was conducted vide Ex.PW11/B. On leading question put by ld. Addl. PP with the permission of the court, he stated that accused was arrested on 29.09.08 and not on 10.09.08.
26. HC Balwan was examined as PW12. He was working as duty officer at PS Sultan Puri on 10.09.08 and proved copy of FIR as Ex.PW12/A. He also proved the endorsement made on the rukka by him Ex.PW12/B.
27. HC Balraj was examined as PW-13. On 03.05.08, he was working as DD writer at Police Post Prem Nagar, PS Sultan Puri. On receiving the information from Ct. Yashpal posted as duty constable at DDU Hospital regarding death of Radhey Shyam. He recorded DD No. 16, true copy of which is Ex.PW13/A.
28. Dr. Akash Jhanji was examined as PW-14. He was the Chairman of Medical Board of Doctors. Dr. Mukta Rani and Dr. Sunil were the members. They conducted the postmortem on the dead SC No: 58292/16 FIR No: 589/2008 PS: Sultan Puri State Vs. Dhananjay etc. Page 13 of 22 body. They gave the cause of death as asphyxia as a result of laryngeal edema. Postmortem findings are suggestive of allergic/anaphylactic reaction. The skin and subcutaneous tissues from the prick sides were preserved to rule out administered substance/drug. The postmortem report proved as Ex.PW14/A. On 13.02.08, IO moved an application seeking subsequent opinion and also placed CFSL report before the Board. They considered the report. The subsequent opinion is Ex.PW14/B wherein doctor again gave the cause of death as asphyxia consequent to laryngeal edema and that postmortem findings are suggestive of anaphylactic reaction.
29. Dr. Deepali Taneja was examined as PW-15. On 03.05.06 at 6.40 p.m., patient Radhey Shyam aged about 40 years was brought to DDU Hospital by Sangam Lal. She examined the patient and declared him brought dead vide Ex.PW15/A.
30. Sh. Devender Sharma, Office Superintendent, Directorate of Vigilance was examined as PW-16. He deposed that on 10.05.06 after receiving a request from Deputy Secretary (Home), GNCT of Delhi, a Medical Board of Dr. Akash Jhanji, Dr. Mukta Rani and Dr. Sunil was constituted for conducting postmortem on the dead body of deceased Radhey Shyam. He proved the photocopy of the order as Ex.PW16/A.
31. HC Satpal was examined as PW-17. He was posted as MHC (M) SC No: 58292/16 FIR No: 589/2008 PS: Sultan Puri State Vs. Dhananjay etc. Page 14 of 22 in police station Sultan Puri on 11 th May, 2016. He proved the entry at serial no. 9732 in register no. 19 as Ex.PW17/A.
32. Dr. Mukta Rani was examined as PW-18 and she deposed on the lines of PW14 and corroborated his testimony.
33. Dr. Deepali Taneja was again examined as PW-19 who was deputed by Superintendent of DDU Hospital to depose in place of Dr. Vivek who has left the hospital. She proved the death report of Radhey Shyam prepared by Dr. Vivek as Ex.PW19/A.
34. Sh. A.S. Dutta. Junior Scientific Officer of CFSL, Kolkota was examined as PW20 and he proved detailed examination report of the exhibits as Ex.PW20/A and he did not find any common poison/drug in the exhibits. Testimony of this witness gain unchallenged and uncontroverted.
35. IO Inspector Yashpal was examined as PW-21. He was part IO and proved the investigation carried out by him.
36. ASI Krishan Kumar was examined as PW-22 and proved the investigation carried out by him.
37. ACP Mahender Singh was examined as PW23. He endorsed the complaint of Savitri. The endorsement is proved as Ex.PW23/A and thereafter, the FIR was registered.
38. Thereafter, prosecution evidence was closed. Statement of accused persons were recorded u/s. 313 Cr.P.C. They stated that they have been falsely implicated. Accused Dhananjay did SC No: 58292/16 FIR No: 589/2008 PS: Sultan Puri State Vs. Dhananjay etc. Page 15 of 22 not wish to lead evidence in defence. However, accused Vinod Gupta wished to lead evidence in defence but no witness was examined.
39. Statement u/s. 313 Cr.P.C. was again recorded with respect to getting of FIR registered by PW23 after endorsing the complaint and at that time, accused persons stated that they did not want to lead evidence in defence. Thereafter, the case was fixed for final arguments.
40. I have heard ld. Addl. PP for the State and ld. Counsel for accused persons and gone through the record.
41. Ld. APP for the State submitted that in this case one person namely Radhey Shyam lost his life only because one quak who claimed himself to be a doctor but was not having any such qualification to practice as doctor and administered injection to late Sh. Radhey Shyam. Infact the accused Dhananjay claim that his a doctor and he is qualified in R.D.O. Electro Homeopathy System but still he was practicing allopathy which is not permitted under law. He played with the life of innocent persons and also claimed one life. Ld. APP submitted that deceased was neighbour of accused Dhananjay. Smt. Savitri PW-2 wife of Sh. Radhey Shyam requested Dhananjay to examine her husband, and he administered injection subsequent to administering injection Sh. Radhey Shaym developed complication. Accused Dhananjay took SC No: 58292/16 FIR No: 589/2008 PS: Sultan Puri State Vs. Dhananjay etc. Page 16 of 22 him to Manthan Hospital there also two injections i.e. Injection Atropine and Injection Effcorlin were injected. The prescription slip in this regard is proved on record as Ex.PW4/A. Accused Dhananjay administered injection Ethrocin but he was neither competent nor knowing the complication of administering injection and treatment in case of patient develops allergy to injection. Even at Manthan Hospital the other co-accused Dr. Vinod Gupta did not take care of patient, injection Adrenaline was not administered even after the patient has suffered anaphylacitic- shock. Ld. APP submitted that the report of the medical board Ex.PW9/A in this regard is very clear where on page 4 it has been specifically observed that:
"the possibility that the injection allegedly administered by Sh. Dhananjay Kumar Moriya to the patient resulting in a vital anaphylacitic shock cannot be ruled out. The person who administered the said injection was neither aware of this complication nor the treatment thereof."
42. Ld. APP submitted that the board has also reached to the conclusion that "the treatment administered in Manthan Hospital viz., Inj. Atropin and Inj. Effcorlin may have been beneficial to the deceased patient. However, no inj.
SC No: 58292/16 FIR No: 589/2008 PS: Sultan Puri State Vs. Dhananjay etc. Page 17 of 22 Adrenaline was administered at any stage to this patient with anaphylacitic shock".
43. Ld. APP submitted from this it is clear that Dr. Vinod did not take care to inject Adrenaline which was required under the circumstances to save one valuable life and this action shows that Dr. Vinod Gupta was also negligent which amounts to medical negligence and which is responsible for causing death.
44. Ld. APP submitted that when the condition of the patient deteriorated and could not be controlled, Dr. Vinod Gupta referred patient to DDU hospital but on the way Dr. Vinod Gupta left the patient unattended on the road. From there PW-2 has managed one TSR to take her husband to hospital where he was declared brought dead. Ld. APP submitted that under the circumstances as Dhananjay is practicing as allopathy doctor though he is not authorised to practising as such in the modern medicine i.e. allopathy system of treatment he is liable to be held guilty u/s 27 Delhi Medical Counsel Act 1997 and both doctor Dhanjay and Dr. Vinod Gupta are also liable for causing death due to medical negligence.
45. Ld. Defence counsel for accused Dhananjay submitted that there is no evidence against him that he gave any treatment to the deceased. The witnesses PW-2 did not utter a single word against accused that he in any manner gave treatment to her SC No: 58292/16 FIR No: 589/2008 PS: Sultan Puri State Vs. Dhananjay etc. Page 18 of 22 husband. She specifically stated that her husband was suffering from vomiting and loose motion she took him to Manthan Hospital at about 8 am where he was admitted. She does not say that her husband was treated by Dhananjay or Dhananjay administered any injections to her husband. During cross examined by Ld. Defence counsel she specifically stated that "accused Dhananjay"
has not treated her husband. It is correct that there is no fault of accused Dhananjay in the death of her husband. It is correct that accused Dhananjay has been falsely implicated in this case without any fault on his part". Ld. Counsel submitted that all these facts clearly show that Dhananjay has not treated her husband he was not practicing in modern Medical System medicine. Ld. Counsel submitted that under the circumstances as there is no evidence hence he be acquitted.
46. Ld. Defence counsel for Vinod Gupta submitted that there is no evidence against him that he treated the accused or administered any injection or was negligent. Though PW-2 stated that Dr. Vinod was treating her husband but there is no such evidence brought on record. There are also contradictions in the statement of PW-2 and PW-3. PW-2 stated that she took Radhey Shyam to Manthan Hospital and her brother-in-law only arrived lateron when she had gone to her home to see her children. And her brother-in-law was also not with her when her husband was shifted to DDU, but PW-
SC No: 58292/16 FIR No: 589/2008 PS: Sultan Puri State Vs. Dhananjay etc. Page 19 of 22 3 stated that it was he who took his brother to Manthan hospital and it was he who was taking his brother to DDU hospital and at that time PW-2 was not with him. Ld. Counsel submitted that again this witness does not say that Dr. Vinod Gupta treated his brother He only stated that he came to know that due to negligence of Dr. Vinod Gupta the condition of his brother deteriorated. Ld. Counsel submitted that there is no other evidence against the accused rather the medical board has exonerated him as according to board two injections which was allegedly injected in Manthan hospital were beneficial to the deceased. However, board was of the opinion that Injection Adrenalin should have been administered but merely due to error of Judgment a doctor cannot be said to be negligent. Ld. Counsel submitted that under the circumstances benefit be given to the accused and he be acquitted.
47. After hearing the arguments and going through the record I found that there is no evidence brought on record, except that PW-2 admitted that she had taken her husband to accused Dhananjay who treated him first. But she stated that no injection was given to her husband by Dhananjay. Infact initially she stated that no treatment was given by Dhananjay and she also deposed that infact there is no fault of accused Dhananjay in the death of her husband and that he has been falsely implicated. It is also SC No: 58292/16 FIR No: 589/2008 PS: Sultan Puri State Vs. Dhananjay etc. Page 20 of 22 important to note here that a medical board was constituted. They gave opinion Ex.PW9A but that report is of no help, Keeping in view the statement of PW-2 who stated that no injection was given by accused Dhananjay. The report also observed that the injections Atropin and Effcorlin were beneficial to the deceased, which were allegedly administered in Manthan hospital by accused Vinod Gupta. There is also no evidence as to due to which medicine or treatment the death has occurred as specifically deposed by PW-18 Dr. Mukta Rani, member of the board who gave opinion Ex.PW9/A and deposed that "I cannot suggest the medicine or any other treatment due to which the cause of death has occurred, however, the death has occurred due to asphyxia as a result of Laryngeal edema can happen due to any reason suggest to allergic and anphylletic reaction.
48. There is also no evidence brought on record that Dhananjay was practising in allopathic system of medicine. Witness Ravinder Prasad Gupta examined by prosecution as PW-5 did not support the prosecution case. He was cross-examined by APP but he denied the suggestion that he supplied the blank slips of his medical store to accused Dhananjay or accused Dhananjay prescribed on the slip for purchase of tablet Althrocin 250 mg or that he delivered the medicine to Savitri Devi PW-2.
49. Keeping in view all these facts I found that prosecution has failed SC No: 58292/16 FIR No: 589/2008 PS: Sultan Puri State Vs. Dhananjay etc. Page 21 of 22 to prove and establish the case beyond doubt, hence given benefit of doubt. Both the accused are acquitted. Their bail bonds are extended for the period of six months u/s 437A Cr.PC. File be consigned to record room.
Announced in the open court
today on 20.07.2016 (VIRENDER KUMAR BANSAL)
ASJ-03/North/Rohini Courts
New Delhi.
SC No: 58292/16 FIR No: 589/2008
PS: Sultan Puri State Vs. Dhananjay etc. Page 22 of 22