Suman blood transfusion case: Prosecution failed to produce IAS officer that led to acquittal, says local courthttps://indianexpress.com/article/cities/chandigarh/suman-blood-transfusion-case-prosecution-failed-to-produce-ias-officer-that-led-to-acquittal-says-local-court/

Suman blood transfusion case: Prosecution failed to produce IAS officer that led to acquittal, says local court

The court said, the prosecution failed to produce the complainant or the victim in the court, in spite of several summons were issued.

WHILE A local court acquitted doctors of Government Multi-Specialty Hospital (GMSH), Sector 16, last week in the case pertaining to wrong blood transfused to one Suman who was 36 weeks pregnant, it has observed that the prosecution has “failed” to produce the complainant who was an IAS officer that has led to the acquittal of the accused persons.

Pronouncing the judgment on Wednesday, the court of judicial magistrate (first class) Gaurav Dutta held that the court had given the prosecution various opportunities and had sent the summons through SSP as well. However, the prosecution failed to produce the complainant or the victim in the court.

Highlighting that the complainant was a public servant, the court said, “The complainant was an IAS officer and could have been produced by the prosecution… but the prosecution still could not procure his address in spite of direction by the court to trace his new posting. The evidence of the prosecution was closed by order after giving the said assistance. Thus, there was no direct evidence against the accused persons qua all the points of determination for proving the guilt of the accused.”

Pointing out loopholes in the police investigation, the court held, “Ram Parkash was investigating officer of the case. He admitted that his entire investigation was based upon the inquiry held by the board conducted before the registration of case. He did not have any personal knowledge about the facts of the case.”

Advertising

In the present case, in spite of various opportunities granted by the court, the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused by way of direct evidence as neither the complainant nor the victim turned up to give evidence.

Watch Video: What’s making news

The court noted, “As far as circumstantial evidence is concerned, the said evidence was also not clinching so as to lead to only one inference that the accused persons were solely responsible for the renal failure and as well as death of foetus of the victim.”

The court mentioned that none of the prosecution witnesses while deposing before the court said anything incriminating against the accused persons. Only Dr Sapna gave circumstantial evidence against Dr Navdeep Kaur.