Latest news with #GGireesh
Time of India
8 hours ago
- Health
- Time of India
Clinical examination of child with parent's consent won't attract offences under Pocso Act, rules Kerala HC
Kochi: Kerala high court has quashed a Pocso case against a 70-year-old paediatrician, holding that the clinical examination of a child, conducted with the consent of a parent or guardian, does not attract offences under the Pocso Act . Justice G Gireesh issued the order while allowing a petition filed by the doctor to quash the case and further proceedings pending before the fast track special court (Pocso Act), Kozhikode. The allegation was that the petitioner had sexually assaulted a Class X student on two occasions during medical examinations conducted in the presence of her family members. The girl stated that on April 11, 2023, she visited the clinic with her mother for treatment of chest and abdominal pain, during which the doctor allegedly touched her inappropriately. A similar incident was said to have occurred on April 17, 2024, when she was accompanied by her elder sister. The sister noticed the victim shivering and later confronted the doctor, which led to the police complaint. However, upon examining the records, the court noted that neither the mother nor the sister alleged that the medical examination was conducted out of their view. It further observed that it is difficult to believe the petitioner would have acted inappropriately in the close presence of the victim's family members. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Brass Krishna Idols For Prosperity & Protection In Life Luxeartisanship Shop Now Undo While the victim may have perceived the touch as a 'bad touch', the court held that it would be unsafe to rely on an isolated and possibly misunderstood remark to infer sexual intent. The court also cited Section 41 of the Pocso Act, which explicitly states that the provisions relating to child sexual offences (Sections 3 to 13) do not apply to medical examinations or treatment carried out with the consent of the child's parent or guardian. Accordingly, the court quashed the case and the further court proceedings against the doctor.
Time of India
20-05-2025
- Health
- Time of India
Can't blame doctors for every death during treatment, rules Kerala high court
Kochi: High court, in a significant judgment, held that a doctor cannot be prosecuted for every mishap or death occurring during treatment. The court further observed that only in cases involving a gross lack of competence, inaction, or wanton indifference to a patient's safety — arising from gross ignorance or gross negligence — could a doctor be compelled to face trial for criminal negligence . Justice G Gireesh made these observations while allowing a petition filed by a gastroenterologist at a private hospital in Ernakulam seeking to quash the final report and further proceedings in a case alleging medical negligence that allegedly resulted in a patient's death. According to prosecution, a young man who had undergone renal transplantation later died at the hospital while under treatment for an intestinal ailment in the early hours of May 26, 2012. As his condition worsened during the night, the duty nurse contacted the petitioner, who then prescribed medicines over the phone. Later that night, the patient was shifted to the Nephrology Intensive Care Unit, where he succumbed to renal complications. The allegation against the petitioner was that by administering treatment over the telephone instead of directing the nurse to have the patient examined by a nephrologist, he caused the patient's death due to renal failure. Despite two expert committee reports stating that the patient appeared to have received reasonable medical and nursing care, the investigating officer sought a further opinion from the state-level apex medical body, which found fault with the petitioner and directed that he be investigated for criminal negligence. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Trade Bitcoin & Ethereum – No Wallet Needed! IC Markets Start Now Undo While considering the petition, HC observed that none of the expert panel members found fault with the medicines prescribed by the petitioner. It held that under no circumstances could the treatment provided be considered an act of criminal negligence attracting Section 304A of the IPC. The court reiterated that even where a patient's death results from an error of judgment or accident, no criminal liability arises. Mere inadvertence or some degree of lack of care and caution may give rise to civil liability but is insufficient to impose criminal responsibility on a medical professional. The court also cited a Supreme Court judgment, which warned that if courts were to impose criminal liability on hospitals and doctors for every untoward outcome, it would lead to doctors being more concerned about their safety than providing the best possible care to patients. This, the apex court had cautioned, could erode the mutual trust essential in the doctor-patient relationship.
