Show cause notice issued to Gurugram's Medanta Hospital in air hostess sexual assault case
The Haryana government on Wednesday issued a notice to Gurugram's Medanta Hospital, seeking a reply on the alleged violation of human dignity and privacy after an air hostess claimed that she was sexually assaulted by a staff member while on ventilator support.
The show cause notice to the medical director of the hospital was issue by Gurugram Civil Surgeon Dr Alka Singh on the basis of the instructions given by the Haryana Health and Family Welfare Minister Arti Singh Rao, a news agency PTI report said.
Officials said that the hospital has been directed to submits its reply within five working days.
A 46-year-old air hostess was allegedly sexually assaulted by a staff member of the hospital, an incident that came to light after she filed a complaint on April 14.
A technician of the Medanta Hospital was later arrested in connection with the sexual assault. The accused was identified as a 25-year-old Deepak, a resident of Badhuali village in Bihar's Muzaffarpur district.
The woman was admitted to the Gurugram hospital on April 5 after she fell sick following a swim in the pool of a hotel she was staying in. In her complaint, she alleged that on April 6, she was on ventilator when "some hospital staff sexually assaulted" her. She also claimed that two nurses were present in the room at the time of the incident, but did nothing to stop it.
Notably, the show cause notice to the hospital has said that as per the Charter of Patients' Rights and Responsibilities under Section 6 of the Clinical Establishments (Registration and Regulation) Act, confidentiality, human dignity and privacy have to be observed during treatment.
It further said that under Section 7 of the Act, the presence of a woman has to be ensured by the male doctor during the physical examination of a female patient.
"In this case, both the clauses have been violated by the establishment Through the notice, it is directed that the Medanta Hospital submit its reply within five working days under Section 40 of the CEA Act (2010)," the notice read.
The police arrested Deepak after four days of manhunt. A special investigation team (SIT) had been formed to investigate the case, wherein eight teams were involved and footages from around 800 CCTV cameras were scanned.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
33 minutes ago
- Time of India
Hyderabad land dispute: Unauthorised possession with intent to occupy or construct qualifies as land grabbing, says Supreme Court
1 2 3 Hyderabad: Mere unauthorised possession with an intent to occupy or construct qualifies as land grabbing, the Supreme Court observed. The court made the observations while refusing to grant relief to a businessman from the city who was proclaimed a land-grabber for illegally occupying private land in Saroor Nagar. The businessman had moved the Supreme Court challenging the orders of the special court and the Telangana high court evicting him from the 252 square yards of disputed land. Ruling that there was no evidence in support of his claims, the apex court refused to interfere in the high court's orders and dismissed the appeal. The appellant, VSR Mohan Rao, claimed he had lawfully acquired 252 square yards of land through a sale deed in March 1997 and constructed a double-storied building. However, the legal heirs of the original landowner, KSR Murthy, disputed the possession and contended that the property was part of a 555 square yard plot in survey 9 they had purchased through a sale deed registered in 1965. The court-appointed survey commissioner confirmed that the disputed land falls within Survey 9 — not survey 10 as claimed in Mohan Rao's deed. Mohan Rao's earlier civil suits for injunction against the landowner and the municipality were also either dismissed or withdrawn, weakening his claim further, the Supreme Court observed. The Supreme Court further clarified that under the Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, criminal intent (mens rea) is not necessary to classify an act as land grabbing. The court emphasised that once prima facie ownership is proven by the applicant, the burden of proof shifts to the accused land grabber — which Mohan Rao failed to discharge. Dismissing the appeal, the Supreme Court affirmed the petitioner's eviction from the land and deemed the appellant's claim of adverse possession untenable due to lack of evidence.
Indian Express
an hour ago
- Indian Express
Delhi: 3 men arrested for assaulting minor boy
Three men were arrested Monday for allegedly assaulting a minor boy, said police. The men, who work in a shop in a popular market in Southwest Delhi, were captured on video allegedly hitting the boy and forcing him to remove the belt from his pants. Police said they have registered an FIR against a garment shop owner, along with his two shops assistants, under BNS sections 115(2) (voluntarily causing hurt), 127(2) (wrongful confinement), and 351 (criminal intimidation), along with Section 75 (cruelty to a child) of the Juvenile Justice Act and Section 12 (sexual harassment of a child) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. The child will be presented before the Child Welfare Committee soon, said police sources. A shopkeeper who claimed to have witnessed the abuse, on condition of anonymity, said, 'The boy's mother is really poor and works in the market…' He said the boy would ask for money or food from the men on days he was hungry, leading them to allegedly exploit his vulnerability. 'The man and his brother lured the boy first by giving him scraps of food and Rs 10-20 daily… after that we'd see (the man) viciously hitting the boy… the way they'd hit him was horrifying,' he alleged.
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Ludhiana West byelection: Over one-third candidates face criminal charges
As the Ludhiana West assembly byelection draws near, disclosures made in nomination papers of the candidates have revealed that nearly 36% of the contesting candidates are facing criminal charges, with one convicted candidate. According to data from the Election Commission of India (ECI), five out of 14 candidates in the fray have declared criminal cases against them in their nomination papers. Among these Jatinder Sharma of the National Lok Seva Party is the only declared convicted candidate. As per his affidavit, Kumar was convicted by a Malerkotla court in August, 2010, under Sections 420 and 406 of the IPC, relating to cheating and criminal breach of trust. However, he has filed an appeal, and the case is currently under revision before the Punjab and Haryana high court. Former cabinet minister and Congress candidate Bharat Bhushan Ashu has disclosed two pending cases. The first involves an FIR lodged under Sections 353, 186, and 34 of the IPC, relating to obstruction and assault on a public servant. The case, registered in February 2024, is currently being heard in the local court where charges are yet to be framed. Ashu is also facing a second case filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). The charges include Sections 3, 4, 44, 45, and 70 of the Act, dealing with money laundering and concealing proceeds of crime. As in the previous case, no charges have been framed yet. Independent candidate Gurdeep Singh Kehlon has revealed multiple pending cases against him in his affidavit. These include four FIRs registered in 2018 and 2019. Some of these are registered under sections of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, although specific charges and their descriptions remain unspecified in the nomination documents. Another independent candidate, Neetu Shutteranwala, is facing a criminal case registered under FIR dated 21 March 2020. His case, is currently being heard in a Ludhiana court. The charges include Sections 4 and 7 of the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, Section 66 of the IT Act, Sections 420, 270, 276, and 188 of the IPC along with Section 3 of the Epidemic Diseases Act. The case relates to allegedly promoting home-made medicines during the COVID-19 period in a manner that breached health norms. Lastly, Navneet Gopi, the candidate from Shiromani Akali Dal (Amritsar), has declared a pending criminal case registered dated March 6, 2023. The case is under Section 283 of the IPC, related to obstruction of the public way. As per the Election Commission of India (ECI) norms, candidates contesting elections are mandatorily required to disclose all criminal cases pending against them in their nomination papers, including the details of FIRs, charges framed, and convictions, if any.
