Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: vaginal in Ashish Kumar @ Assu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 4 March, 2022Matching Fragments
with Shri Vijay Gouthariya, D.S.P., Women Safety Branch, Dindori.
Learned Government Advocate in presence of Shri Vijay Gouthariya, D.S.P., Women Safety Branch, Dindori has read report of Dr. Smt. Swati Rai and the statements of the police personnel, submits that there is a bonafide mistake and Vaginal Swab was never taken by her and was never sealed for sampling.
The Backdrop of this case is that on 24.02.2022 when FSL report was produced by learned Panel Lawyer for the respondents/State then in the FSL report issued by the Regional Forensic Science Laboratory, JDA Bhawan, Civik Center, Marhatal, Jabalpur issued by the Joint Director makes a mention that in the memo of the Superintendent of Police there is a mention of presence of Swab in Packet-B but on opening of Packet-B in place of Swab HCG Plastic Strip was found. It is further mentioned that it is not possible to examine presence of Siemen on this HCG Plastic Strip.
Not Verified opinion and sample after preserving it. Since all the samples were sealed in one envelop, therefore, they were again sent to Dr. Swati Rai for sealing them separately. They were sealed by her along with labeling and sent back which were later on sent to FSL, Jabalpur through SHO Shahpur.
Superintendent of Police, Dindori has mentioned that since Vaginal Swab was not demanded but since Dr. Swati Rai in the envelop sent by her had mentioned presence of Vaginal Swab whole material was sent to FSL.
It is further mentioned that since only Vaginal slide was directed to be preserved, therefore, probably Dr. Swati Rai by mistake mentioned Vaginal Slide and Vaginal Swab and sent the sample which were forwarded to FSL, Jabalpur. In this case statements of Dr. Swati Rai were also taken by the concerned Deputy Superintendent of Police. In her statement dated 03.03.2022, Dr. Swati Rai has mentioned that on 04.11.2021 she was on emergency duty at 4.06 pm. Prosecutrix was brought to her by Constable Vandana Beragi and a Head Constable. She had handed over two Vaginal slides, UPT report and one Seal UPT kit, seal sample and MLC report. After 15-20 days woman constable had approached her from Dindori Police Station and had asked her to place collected samples in different envelops. On her oral request Dr. Swati Rai had separated the samples which were collected earlier on 04.11.2021 and had hand over them to the woman constable. It is further mentioned that since in the requisition for MLC, Vaginal Swab was not asked for, therefore, she had not prepared separate Vaginal Swab.
The whole chronology of events raises certain fundamental questions namely, whether as per Medical Protocol Dr. Swati Rai was required to seal Vaginal Swab or not, irrespective of the contents of the requisition. Secondly, if she was not required to collect Vaginal Swab then why she had mentioned presence of Vaginal Swab in one of the envelop which were forwarded by the Superintendent of Police, Dindori. Thirdly, under which Medical Protocol she was authorized to open a sealed envelop containing samples for their separation on oral request of woman constable.