Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

7. On the other hand, learned counsel Mr. Deep Vyas and State Counsel Mr. L.B. Dabhi, vehemently opposed the application and submitted that, the provision of Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 is not applicable to the facts of the present case. There is a specific allegation made in the FIR that, the accused caused miscarriage to her with child without consent of her. The contentions raised by the applicant herein relate to the disputed question of facts, which cannot be adjudicated at this stage and it is tried and tested at the time of trial and therefore, the application is misconceived and liable to be dismissed.

NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/12267/2013 ORDER DATED: 17/04/2023 undefined He has been charged for the offence of causing miscarriage and causing disappearance of evidence with an intention of screening the offender. It is not in dispute that, the State Government granted recognition to the applicant for undertaking the work of Medical Termination of Pregnancy as provided under the Act 1971. The admitted prescription dated 01.02.2012, produced at page-39, of this petition shows that, after detection of the pregnancy, the victim came to the hospital of the applicant with the complaint of pain in lower abdomen and bleeding. She was advised to Dilation and Curettage and with the consent of her and other relatives present at the hospital, the applicant performed DNE procedure and removed the material from the uterus.

10. In the aforesaid facts, this Court is of the opinion that, the ingredients of Section 312 so far as applicant is concerned, are not attracted, as being a Doctor, he did not have cause miscarriage to the victim. The Section 312 deals with the causing of miscarriage with consent of the woman. The Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 provides for medical termination by registered medical practitioner. In the facts of present case, when victim was taken to the hospital of the applicant, there was already miscarriage found to her by the applicant and accordingly, he performed NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/12267/2013 ORDER DATED: 17/04/2023 undefined the necessary procedure. As per the medical terminology, three distinct terms i.e. abortion, miscarriage and pre-mature labor are used to denote the expulsion within the first three months of pregnancy before the placenta is found, miscarriage is used when the fetus is expelled from the forth to seven month of gestation before it is visible, while pre- mature labor is a delivery of a visible child possibly capable of doing reared, before it has become fully mature.

14. In light of the settled proposition of law on the subject quashing of the criminal proceedings and applying to the facts and circumstances of the present case, this Court is of the opinion that, the victim has not alleged against the applicant herein that, the applicant caused miscarriage though there was consent on her part. It needs to be noted that, four times, she had gone the procedure of abortion and /or miscarriage at different hospitals. Thus, prima-facie, it appears that the investigation agency with ulterior motive, without sufficient evidence, implicated the applicant Doctor in the alleged offence. The case papers of the victim placed on record by the applicant herein, shows that the allegations of destroying the evidence to screen the offender are also not tenable and therefore, ingredients of Section 201 also not attracted.