Delhi Court grants relief to paediatric surgeon accused of removing child's kidney sans consent of parents

A Delhi court, last week, quashed a Magistrate order directing the registration of a First Information Report (FIR) against a pediatric-surgeon over allegations of medical negligence in removing the kidney of a minor boy. [Dr YK Sarin vs Ravinder Nath Pandey]..Additional Sessions Judge Dheeraj Mor granted relief to Dr YK Sarin, who had been accused of removing the left kidney of a two-year-old child without his parents' consent. The parents alleged that the kidney removed was functional and that its removal amounted to criminal negligence..The Court found that there was no incriminating material on record to prove such claims against the doctor or to justify the filing of an FIR."There is not even an iota of incriminating material against the petitioner on record in the form of a report of a competent doctor or committee of doctors, specialized in the field relating to which the medical negligence is attributed. In absence of the said pre-requisite prima facie opinion of a medical expert, the directions for registration of FIR against the petitioner defies the guidelines and principles laid down by the Hon'ble Superior Courts...", the Judge said..The Court added that an FIR cannot be lodged against the doctor on the complainant's whims and fancies, guided by unfounded and unsubstantiated assumptions only to satisfy his discontentment with the treatment of his child..A Magistrate Court, on October 28, 2021, had ordered the city police to register an FIR against the doctor. Dr Sarin subsequently challenged the Magistrate order..Granting a breather to the surgeon, the Additional Sessions Court set aside the Magistrate order on February 9. The Sessions Court relied on five independent and separate enquiry reports prepared by medical professionals, which absolved the surgeon of any medical negligence.."In all the said enquiries, the medical experts have categorically concluded that no negligence can be attributed on the part of the petitioner in the treatment of the child. They have concluded that there is nothing on record that prima facie substantiate the allegations of the complainant," the judge noted..An inquiry conducted by Union Ministry of Health and Welfare had also found that the doctor had exercised a reasonable degree of commitment in treating the difficult case of the child, the Court observed..The Court further noted that these committees had comprehensively analyzed and inquired into the alleged negligence by the doctors of Lok Nayak hospital, including the petitioner."All the said inquiry reports have absolved the petitioner of negligence in treatment and operation of the child. In absence of attribution of even civil negligence to the petitioner into the allegations of the complainant, question of attributing culpable negligence to him does not arise," the judge underscored. .The petitioner accepted that after the removal of the organ, the child's kidney had not been properly preserved. However, he told the Court that action had been taken against the nurses responsible for the same. Further, he had contended that no criminal offence could be made out against him for such a lapse, even if it were true. The Court agreed with the petitioner-doctor on this count as well, observing, "The ill preservation of removed kidney of the son of the complainant and misplacement of part of his treatment record does not fall within the ambit of any culpable act. The same can at the most be a case of civil negligence, for which FIR cannot be directed to be lodged. Thus, the Trial Court has wrongly placed reliance on the said facts to invoke his powers under section 156(3) of CrPC.".In this backdrop, the Sessions Court concluded that there was no justifiable reason to assume that the petitioner had committed any offence and quashed the Magistrate's order. .Advocates Shiksha Ashra and Namit Saxena appeared for the petitioner. Additional Public Prosecutor Ashesh Kumar represented the State..[Read Order]