Karnataka High Court
State By Kalasa Police vs Babu on 14 June, 2001
Equivalent citations: 2001(4)KARLJ315
Author: K.R. Prasad Rao
Bench: K.R. Prasad Rao
JUDGMENT
1. This is an extremely unfortunate case where the deceased father has succumbed to the injuries inflicted by his own son. Apparently, there was some dispute with regard to the "hut" in which they were living and on the evening of 21-5-1991 at about 7.00 p.m., the accused got into a fight with the deceased father went into the hut brought a "kathi" and inflicted two injuries on the old man, one on the head and one on the arm. From the evidence on record, it is clear that the injuries were not life threatening, the injured was taken to the Government Hospital and after a long lapse of 32 days he finally died. The charge was under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and the learned Trial Judge, after evaluating the evidence which essentially consists of the depositions of the son-in-law P.W. 1-Thowda and P.W. 2-Susheela, who is his daughter as also P.W. 6-Rama, who is the son by the first wife, came to the conclusion that there are too many infirmities in the evidence and accordingly acquitted the accused. The State has challenged the order of acquittal through the present appeal.
2. We have heard the learned Additional State Public Prosecutor, who has taken us through the entire record and his principal submission is that the evidence of P.W. 1 alone is sufficient to sustain the conviction, that there is ample corroboration from the evidence of P.W. 2-Susheela and the medical evidence and the other supportive evidence and that on this material the order of acquittal should be set aside. He has also brought to our notice that the infirmities noted by the learned Trial Judge are extremely trivial and that they are liable to be ignored. Also, he has emphasised that the oral evidence has been tested in the cross-examination and nothing is brought on record to indicate that P.Ws. 1, 2 and 6 have any animus or hostility against the accused nor has it been demonstrated to us that their credibility has been impeached.
3. On behalf of the respondent-accused, the learned Advocate submitted that admittedly there were factions within the family over the dispute relating to the hut and that in the course of the quarrel that took place, it is not very clear as to who exactly inflicted the injuries. It is also on record as pointed out by the learned Advocate that the deceased had consumed some liquor and his submission is that in this condition, it was he who provoked the quarrel. It is also pointed out that there are inconsistencies between the versions of P.Ws. 1, 2 and 6 and consequently the accused is entitled to the benefit of doubt.
4. This is one of the few cases in which we have found that the evidence is almost totally free of any blemish. P.Ws. 1, 2 and 6 are undoubtedly rustic villagers, but, it is clear from their depositions that they have not fabricated anything. It is also evident from the cross-examination that they do not harbour any hostility towards the accused. It has come on record that there was a long standing dispute between the accused and his father and this incident was the culmination of that dispute. We have no hesitation whatsoever in accepting the evidence of these witnesses which is inter se corroborated and which is fully supported by the medical evidence. The order of acquittal was unjustified and the same is accordingly set aside. The injuries on the deceased were such that at the very highest, these could qualify for a conviction under Section 325 of the Criminal Procedure Code. We note with some degree of regret that the deceased, who was a poor man and who apparently had no other medical complications as emerges from the case papers, had probably lost his life because of the unfortunate fact that he was admitted to a Government Hospital. These aspects are relevant insofar as the head of conviction is concerned because undoubtedly the charge was one under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, but, it is rightly pointed out by the learned defence Advocate that the death cannot be attributed to the injuries in question. Even on the question of sentence, apart from the status, background and economic condition of the accused we have taken into consideration the fact that he had spent a consider-
able period of time in custody which, in our considered view, could be more than adequate punishment for the offence committed by him. This is not a case in which any fine would be warranted because the accused is too poor to be able to pay a fine.
5. After hearing this and several other appeals wherein "deaths" have occurred after the injured have been admitted to Government Hospitals in different parts of the State, we have been deeply pained to note that whereas inevitably there are many cases in which the lives could not be saved, that there have been a large number of other cases in which due to negligence, delays and poor quality of treatment, valuable lives have been lost. To compound the situation, very recently a series of surveys were undertaken and reports have been published indicating a very unsatisfactory state of affairs, namely that the corruption levels in these institutions have reached an unprecedented high, the result being that practically no assistance, nursing or medical treatment is administered without payment of money. The pitiable levels of extortion from persons belonging to a "strata of society" who cannot afford these payments make pathetic reading and is the most probable explanation why the Court comes across, with a degree of regularity, instances where lives have unnecessarily and unfortunately been lost.
(emphasis supplied)
6. We have addressed to ourselves the question as to whether or not the State Government should in all seriousness do a total overhaul of the manner in which these institutions are functioning and come down ruthlessly on every instance of professional negligence, inaction, extortion and corruption. These institutions are running on public funds and they are expected to render medical service to the public without any distinction being made against the poorer sections of society. It is in fact their need that is paramount because the more well to do persons can at least avail of private medical services if the need arises. We are pained to note that more than 50 (fifty) years after the Constitution was given effect to that we come across a situation like the present one wherein a poor villager with two relatively minor injuries lingers in a public hospital for over a month and then dies. The record indicates that he was a perfectly healthy man, that the injuries were not life threatening and possibly, even the village medicine man or the Vaidya would have cured him. Unfortunately, being a medico-legal case he was admitted to a Government Hospital and he ultimately lost his life. It is very necessary that corrective action be taken to ensure that value for life, even of the poorest of the poor is considered sacred and that there are no compromises in these cases. It may be that at these levels the victims and their relatives do not have the capacity to fight back when they are wronged. This, however, does not mean that the image of public hospitals instead of being that of institutions where genuine succor is available to the suffering, should be allowed to deteriorate into death chambers. We hope the Hon'ble Minister of Health in the State Government will take serious note of our observations and ensure appropriate corrective action. The learned Government Advocate to forward a copy of this judgment to the Hon'ble Health Minister.
(emphasis supplied)
7. The appeal accordingly succeeds. The order of acquittal is set aside. The accused is convicted of the offence punishable under Section 325 of the Indian Penal Code and he is sentenced to undergo imprisonment for the period equivalent to that undergone by him. The bail bond of the accused to stand cancelled.