Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

4. The present applicant filed an application under Section 227 of Code of Criminal Procedure for discharge contending that she is the owner of medical termination of pregnancy centre situated at Kadam Hospital and the same is registered in her name. However, now her son Neeraj Kadam and daughter in law Dr. Rekha Kadam are looking after the said Centre. Now she is not practicing and except her ownership of the Hospital she is not concerned with the alleged offence. The allegation of causing miscarriage or abortion is against co-accused Dr. Rekha Kadam. None of the statements discloses that either present applicant is visiting the Hospital or looking after the affairs of the Hospital no offence is made out against her. As far as the offence under Sections 376(3), 376(2)(n), 341 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 4 and 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 are not attracted against her. The offence punishable under Section 312 is regarding causing miscarriage. Section 313 is causing miscarriage without woman's consent and Section 315 relates to act done with intent to prevent child being born alive or to cause it to die after birth. None of these offences are attracted against her as none of the witnesses have stated that the present applicant has caused any miscarriage or abortion. As far as the offence under Sections 201 and 506 are concerned are also not applicable as there is no single allegation against her. None of the witnesses have stated that either the present applicant was present at the time of miscarriage or having any knowledge of the admission of the victim at the centre or causing miscarriage to her. The statements of the employees of the Hospital also nowhere reflect that either applicant is practicing or aware of any of the activities. Even offence under Section 21 is also not made out against her as none of the statements discloses that though she was aware about the fact of sexual assault on victim she has not reported the said incident to the Police. Thus, for all above grounds, as no prima facie case is made out against the present applicant, she be discharged from the charges.

12. Applying the principles laid down by the catena of decisions and even accepting the case as it is, it reveals that there is no material collected during the investigation to show that it was the present applicant, who has either treated the victim or she was aware about the admission of the victim in the said Hospital. The entire investigation papers only discloses that being she is owner of the said centre she is shown as an accused. As far as the applicability of Section 312 of the Indian penal Code is concerned which deals with causing miscarriage, the wording of Section 312 states that whoever voluntarily causes a woman with child to miscarry shall, if such miscarriage be not caused in good faith for the purpose of saving the life of the woman be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, years, or with fine, or with both; and, if the woman be quick with child, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.

13. Thus, Section 312 deals with the causing of miscarriage with the consent of woman, while the next section deals with the causing of miscarriage without such consent. The Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 provides for termination of the pregnancy by registered medical practitioner were its continuance would revolve a risk to the life of the pregnant woman or grave injury to her physical or mental health or where there is a substantial risk that if the child were born, it would suffer from the physical or mental abnormalities as to the seriously handicapped. Where the pregnancy is alleged to have been caused by rape or result of failure of a contraceptive used by married woman or her husband, it would be presumed to constitute a grave injury to the mental health of the pregnant woman. The termination of pregnancy by a person who is not registered medical practitioner will be an offence under the Indian Penal Code.

17. On perusal of the ingredients of Sections 312, 313 or 315 the person who causes either miscarriage or causes miscarriage without woman's consent or does an act with intend to prevent child being born alive or to cause it to die after birth are the punishable offence. Here entire charge-sheet nowhere discloses that it was the present applicant who caused either miscarriage or miscarriage without the consent or prevented a child from being born. Thus, except the fact that she is the owner of the said centre no other act is attributed to her.