Gauhati High Court
Rajen Bora vs The State Of Assam on 13 September, 2022
Author: Kalyan Rai Surana
Bench: Kalyan Rai Surana
Page No.# 1/4
GAHC010167162022
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : AB/2368/2022
RAJEN BORA
S/O LT. MOHAN BORA R/I WARD NO. 7 SONARI TOWN, PIN-785690 DIST.
CHARAIDEO, ASSAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M MORE
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA
ORDER
13.09.2022 Heard Mr. M. More, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. Bhaskar Sarma, learned APP for the State.
By this application under section 438 Cr.P.C., the petitioner, namely, Rajen Page No.# 2/4 Bora is seeking bail in connection with Namtola P.S. Case No. 49/2022 under section 304 IPC.
The learned APP has produced the case diary and has opposed the prayer for bail.
The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is an experienced pharmacist and is aged about 70 years and is practicing for more than 45 years.
It is further submitted that the deceased child was suffering from viral fever and the informant had brought her to the pharmacy of the petitioner.
The learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that at the request of the informant, the petitioner had administered injection to her 4 years daughter on the basis of the prescription produced by the informant, i.e. Paracetamol and Dexona. Thereafter, on administration of injection, the daughter of the informant became unconscious, so the petitioner referred to take the daughter of the informant to Sonari Civil Hospital, Rajapukhuri for better treatment on 13.07.2022 and in course of the treatment she had expired and accordingly, it is submitted that the petitioner had administered the injection on the basis of prescription and therefore, he was not responsible for the death of the informant's daughter.
On perusal of the case dairy, it appears that the I.O. has seized one empty ampoule of Diclofenac Sodium Injection I.P 3M.L. powerflam as well as one partly empty ampoule of 2 ML Dexamethasone Sodium Phosphate Injection I.P. i.e. Dexona.
Page No.# 3/4 It is also seen that the Post-Mortem examination report is not final and the M.O. has preserved the viscera to be sent for forensic examination.
The case diary also contents the statement of the petitioner wherein it is stated that " On 13/07/2022 at about 10:30 AM one woman came along with her daughter, aged about 4-5 yrs, to show her daughter due to fever. I examine her daughter by touching her body and I get to know that she has fever. I asked her mother that from how many days she has got fever and from questioning I came to know that her daughter did not want take any medicine, so her mother requested to give an injection to her, so, I injected a paracetamol injection. At that time her mother showed me a prescription of her daughter's earlier treatment and paracetamol syrup was written at the prescription, so, I gave a paracetamol injection to her. I did not ask her where she had showed her daughter and which doctor gave the prescription, I did not examine the prescription carefully. As syrup was written in the prescription and as her mother said that she doesn't want to take syrup and as her mother requested, so, I gave the injection. After some time after injecting the injection, she starts vomiting and her body shakes. So, I thought that there is a reaction from the injection, so I send a boy to nearby Namtola Sahu pharmacy and brought a dexona injection. Though I injected the injection to her, she was unconscious, so, I send her to Sonari Civil Hospital, Rajapukhuri. I did not give any prescription regarding the matter. After that at 12 noon I came back to my house after closing my pharmacy. On that day I came to know that the girl had died. As my health is not good, so, on 14/07/2022 evening I went to Guwahati for treatment."
It appears from the statement made by the petitioner that after injecting Page No.# 4/4 the 2nd injection, i.e. Dexona the condition of the girl was not good and she became unconscious.
From the submission made by the learned counsel of the petitioner, it is apparent that he had administered an injection without prescription to the small girl.
Moreover, it also appears that in the prescription referred to by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the prescribed medicine was for oral paracetamol and it appears that the petitioner administered paracetamol injection after which the child has started vomiting.
In view of above, it is apparent that the petitioner had not administered the prescribed drug on the basis of prescription although he was not a qualified doctor and therefore, notwithstanding that the petitioner is aged 70 years and is a pharmacist, in view of the above, the Court does not find this to be a fit case for enlarging the petitioner on pre-arrest bail.
Accordingly, the prayer for pre-arrest bail is rejected.
Case diary is returned.
Application stands disposed of.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant