IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No. 1874 of 2005 Date of decision: December 14, 2010 Puran Chand .. Petitioner Vs. Pawan Kumar .. Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.N. Jindal Present: Mr. Deepinder Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. None for the respondent. A.N. Jindal, J This is a petition filed by the complainant Puran Chand against the judgment of acquittal dated 14.9.2004 whereby the trial court has acquitted the accused- respondent (herein referred as, 'the respondent') of the charges under Section 304-A IPC. The factual matrix of the case is that the daughter of the complainant namely Inderjit Kaur was pregnant and she was getting treatment from Singla Nursing Home, Dabwali. On 7.4.1996, his daughter gave birth to a female child by a caesarian operation. She remained in hospital till 19.4.1996, but she was having continuous pain in her stomach. She was shown to number of doctors and ultimately Dr. Mela Ram at Bathinda informed that something was left in the stomach at the time of operation or she may be suffering from some disease, therefore, she required another operation. Consequently, she was again operated. The cotton sponge was detected in her stomach. However, due to the presence of sponge, her intestine was infected and she died on 19.5.1997. On the basis of the aforesaid complaint, formal FIR was registered and case was investigated. On submission of the report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. the respondent was charged under Section 304-A IPC to which he pleaded not guilty and opted to contest. In order to substantiate the charges, the prosecution examined Jasmel Kaur (PW1), Puran Chand (PW2), Dr. Bansal (PW3) and Lal Chand (PW4). Criminal Revision No. 1874 of 2005 -2- When examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. the respondent denied all the incriminating circumstances appearing against him and pleaded his false implication in the case. However, in defence, he produced certified copy of the order dated 1.6.2001 Ex.DX and affidavit of Dr. S.K. Singhal Ex.DY. Ultimately the trial resulted into acquittal. Having scrutinized the impugned judgment, the evidence appears to have been appreciated in the right perspective. There is no denying a fact that Inderjit Kaur daughter of the complainant was operated on 7.4.1996 and she expired on 19.4.1997 i.e. after a period of about 13 months. The x-ray, indicating the presence of cotton sponge in the abdomen of the deceased, has not been placed on the record. Testimony of Dr. Mela Ram Bansal (PW3) does not inspire confidence, as according to him cotton sponge was left in the stomach of Inderjit Kaur. Had sponge been left in her stomach on 7.4.1996, then she would not have lived normal life and there would have been infection in her body. Her TLC would not have been normal. Even if it is assumed that the respondent was negligent while performing caesarian operation upon Inderjit Kaur still , it was not approximate cause of her death. That apart, the postmortem examination of the dead body of Inderjit Kaur has not been got conducted in order to ascertain the actual cause of death. Further more, the prosecution has failed to produce the material witnesses i.e. Investigating Officer of this case, Dr. Suman Goel and husband of the deceased. The trial court appears to have appreciated the evidence in the right perspective. No illegallity or irregularity much less perversity has been detected rendering the judgment as invalid warranting interference by this Court. For the foregoing reasons, finding no merit in the petition the same is dismissed. December 14, 2010 (A.N. Jindal) deepak Judge