Must respect Doctors; It will be difficult for them to function if they always face threat of being beaten up or harassed by relatives of patient:P&H HC

Read Order: Naresh Kumar and others Vs. State of Haryana and another 

Tulip Kanth

Chandigarh, October 18, 2021: The Punjab and Haryana Court has dismissed a petition filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., for quashing of FIR in a case wherein the relatives of a patient were alleged to have threatened and beaten up some Doctors of I.M.A.

The present case was registered on the complaint of Dr. S.N. Sharma, R.T.D. Civil Surgeon,  on the allegations that after the death of one patient Ompati, her relatives started making phone calls and they called other persons, who after reaching the Hospital, started creating turmoil and disturbance in the Hospital and they threatened to murder the Doctor.

When the respectable Doctors of I.M.A. reached on the spot, they threatened them to go outside and on not doing the same, they beat up the said Doctors of I.M.A. and even snatched important papers from their hands and also threatened them to go.

 It was further alleged that the staff members had great danger to their life and property from the said persons. In the FIR, it had been stated that Haryana Medicare Service Persons and Medicare Service Institutions (Prevention of Violence and Damage to Property) Act, 2009 is applicable to Haryana and thus, accordingly the FIR was registered. 

Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the present FIR was a counter blast to the FIR registered by first petitioner against Dr. Pankaj Parashar and Dr. Raj Kumar Sharma. It was also submitted that in the present case, offence under Section 147 of the IPC for rioting and offence under Section 323 of the IPC was not made out as it had not been specifically stated as to which person was  beaten up and offence under Section 506 of the IPC was also not made out as it was only an empty threat that was alleged to have been given.

The Bench of Justice Vikas Bahl opined that reference to the FIR registered by the petitioners’ party went against the petitioners, inasmuch as per the allegations even in the said FIR, the incident had been admitted. The cancellation report had alsobeen submitted in the said FIR which also prima facie proved that the version given by the petitioners was incorrect.

According to the Bench, it was hard to believe that the case projected by the petitioners i.e. negligence was on the part of the Doctor, the threat was also made by the Doctor and the medical papers were also not given by the Doctor and yet, on top of that the Doctor abused the petitioners and their family members.

The Court found that there was no truth in the allegations made by the petitioners’ side as in the cancellation report reference had been made to the CCTV Footage as per which the medical papers were found to have been snatched from Dr. Raj Kumar Sharma by the complainant party (present petitioners) and fist fighting with Dr. Pankaj Parashar was also seen and it was the other Doctors who were trying to save the said Doctor. 

A perusal of the FIR as well as cancellation report submitted in the FIR registered by the petitioners would show that prima facie force and violence had been used by the relatives of the deceased Ompati and they were found to be in an unlawful assembly, thus, offence under Section 149 IPC would stand prima facie made out, added the Bench.

It was also held that the allegations also prima facie constituted offence of voluntarily causing hurt. The FIR cannot be considered to be an ‘encyclopedia’ giving out each and every fact, stated the Bench.

The Court went on to state that even from the document annexed by the petitioners i.e. cancellation report, it came to surface that as per the CCTV camera recordings, some fist blows had been given to Dr. Pankaj Parashar and the papers were snatched from Dr. Raj Kumar Sharma. At any rate, all the said facts would come about after the investigation was complete. Further, no authority of law had been cited by the counsel for the petitioners to show that FIR could be quashed on account of delay of two days.

Dismissing the Petition, the Court expressed the view that there would be a feeling of sympathy towards persons whose family member has passed away but the said persons including the petitioners must respect the Doctors who always try their best to save the lives of patients and, thus, such persons should not breach the law in case some untoward incident happens.

The Bench concluded the matter by stating that it will be difficult for the Doctors to function in our country if they always face the threat of being beaten up or being harassed by the relatives of patients as every single day, they have to deal with situations in which life and death of a patient is involved.