Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.20242 of 2012 ====================================================== Md. Aras Ansari S/O Late Habib Ansari Resident Of Village- Mathia, Police Station- Ramnagar, District- West Champaran .... .... Petitioner Versus The State Of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL ORDER 2 31-05-2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State. Petitioner seeks bail in Ramnagar P. S. Case No. 278 of 2011 registered for offence punishable under [STATUTE] and Section 3(1)(X) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe ( Prevention of Atrocities) Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case for oblique reasons. The allegation is that the husband of the informant was ill and when he reached at Harinagar Railway Station and went to Bhagat Singh Chowk in the town of Harinagar, the petitioner met them and suggested that they should get treatment in the clinic of Dr. Suresh Ram. Thereafter, the husband of the informant was Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.20242 of 2012 (2) dt.31-05-2012 2 / 4 2 suggested to undergo an operation in which it is alleged that irregularities were committed and inspite of the husband of the informant being operated, a part of his intestine was cut away which resulted in further complication for which he had to be treated elsewhere. It is further alleged in the F.I.R. that when the informant went to the clinic of Dr. Suresh Ram, she was abused by taking her caste name. The allegation in the F.I.R. is that the petitioner along with Dr. Suresh Ram and another doctor were negligent in performing the surgery. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner has no concern with the clinic or the operation conducted by the doctors since he has only a medicine shop. It is submitted that even if the operation was performed, it was by qualified doctors inasmuch as Dr. Suresh Ram is a qualified doctor and the other namely Dr. Jitendra Prasad is also a qualified medical practitioner and in fact he is M.B.B.S., M.S. Learned counsel has gone further and submits that even in such cases at best the informant may have a case against the doctors concerned before the Consumer Court for compensation but the criminal case is an abuse of the process of the court. It is further submitted that the Hon’ble Apex Court has laid down the procedure of launching criminal prosecution against the professionals including doctors in which it has been held that Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.20242 of 2012 (2) dt.31-05-2012 3 / 4 3 prior to a prosecution being launched on the criminal side, there has to be a report from a technical body, consisting of doctors, giving a definite finding that there was willful and deliberate negligence on the part of the concerned doctors. Learned counsel submits that as per the allegation it is the informant who is said to have gone to the clinic of Dr. Suresh Ram who also abused her by taking caste name. It is submitted that Dr. Suresh Ram himself is a Scheduled Caste and thus the charge under Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act is not sustainable. It is stated that the petitioner has clean antecedent and is in custody since 30.1. 2012. Learned A.P.P. for the State on the other hand submits that the petitioner was instrumental in the informant’s husband going to the clinic of Dr. Suresh Ram due to which he had to face so much of trouble and monetary loss and the case was not only of mishandling but also of operation conducted or done negligently. Upon hearing learned counsels for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the abovenamed petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-( Ten thousand ) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.20242 of 2012 (2) dt.31-05-2012 4 / 4 4 Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bagaha, West Champaran, in connection with Ramnagar P. S. Case No. 278 of 2011. sudip/- (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.)

Applicable IPC Section: 504

Statute Text:
Section 504 of the Indian Penal Code. Insult intended to provoke breach of the peace. Whoever intentionally insults, and thereby gives provocation to any person, intending or knowing it to be likely that such provocation will cause him to break the public peace, or to commit any other offence, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.