Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

14. Mr. Sanjay Singh, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of complainant/O.P. No.2 while addressing the issues submitted that the husband of the Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27653 of 2024 dt.25-04-2025 petitioner categorically recorded that the right kidney of the complainant was present before operation in the year 2000 in his prescription. The complainant was treated for "Chyluria", where pyelolymphatic duct was operated for milky discharge of urine. It is submitted that after operation, the complainant developed pain and, thereafter, he was treated with another physician i.e. Dr. Ajay Kumar Sinha in the year 2003. During the said treatment only, he came to know that his right kidney is not visible. It is submitted that even the report of AIIMS, New Delhi and Mahavir Cancer Sansthan, Patna suggest that right kidney of complainant/O.P. No.2 was not visible. Therefore, at this stage, the report dated 12.08.2016 of P.G.I., Chandigarh could not be considered, as same is the matter of trial. It is also submitted by Mr. Singh that the presence of petitioner in O.T. (operation theater) of her husband was un-occasioned, and, therefore, her un- occasioned presence in operation theater making a prima facie doubt qua conspiracy. It is also pointed out that fact qua conspiracy can also be ascertained during the trial only, as at this stage, this court cannot consider the materials in its Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27653 of 2024 dt.25-04-2025 probative terms particularly, when the learned Sessions Judge has rejected the petition of the petitioner preferred under Section 227 of the Cr.P.C.

Way back in year 2000 Satish Kumar was treated at Adarsh Nursing Home, Patna by Dr. Sailesh Kumar Sinha. As per the record provided, Satish Kumar was suffering from chyluria. He had an abdominal ultrasonography as advised by Dr. Sailesh and that had confirmed presence of both the normal sized kidneys (only the report has been provided, no image is attached). He was taken up for cystoscopy by Dr. Sailesh and findings recorded as "efflux of milky urine noted from right ureter". Subsequently the Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27653 of 2024 dt.25-04-2025 patient was taken up for open surgery on right kidney. As per record he had performed pyelolymphatic disconnection in September 2000. He had stayed about three weeks in the hospital. During his say he had pus discharge from the wound. Dr. Sailesh had asked for opinion ts from a physician Dr. Ajay Kumar Sinha. Subsequently Dr. Sailesh had got another abdominal ultrasonography of the patient which shows the presence of both the kidneys as per the record provided (no image included). The patient was discharged and never gone back to the surgeon. He was being treated by Dr. Ajay Kumar Sinha and others. In 2003, abdominal ultrasonography was performed and was reported about the absence of right kidney. Then his IVF was also done which confirmed absence of right kidney. He was referred to AIIMS (New Delhi) and was seen in 2004. On ultrasound examination (contd.) absence of right kidney was again reported. Attending doctor also got the renal scan done which also had confirmed the absence of right kidney.
As per the complainant his kidney was taken out by Dr. Sailesh Sinha at the time of surgery in year 2000.
After going through the records the board members felt that the following questions needed to be answered:
1. Whether the right kidney. of the patient was absent since birth or
2. It was normal and was taken out surgically.
18. From the perusal of records and the history of treatment of complainant/O.P. No.2, it transpires that admittedly the prescription of Dr. Shailesh Kumar Sinha, who is the husband of petitioner is not supported by any hard copy/image of Ultrasonography. There is no complication alleged to be arising out of post-surgery except pain and fever, which was treated later on by Dr. Ajay Kumar Sinha.

The aforesaid report of P.G.I., Chandigarh suggests that the complainant left the test for a long period and has made Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27653 of 2024 dt.25-04-2025 himself available only in the year-2016 to get it concluded. It also appears that none of the radiological tests prior to P.G.I., Chandigarah suggests that it was a case of kidney removal rather it only suggest that the right kidney of O.P. No.2 is not visualized.