Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram
Tags:
Journalism of Courage
“Will you risk taking anyone from your family for treatment to your client?” was the Delhi High Court’s only question. But it was enough to stump a lawyer arguing for the bail of a doctor who has been charged with causing death of a child due to reckless treatment.
Speechless,the lawyer first tried to evade the query saying it was his professional compulsion to stand for his client. But with persistent grilling by Justice S N Dhingra,he relented and said NO.
That admission was enough for Justice Dhingra to dismiss the anticipatory bail plea of Firoz Khan. As per the prosecution,Khan ran an eight-bed nursing home-cum-polyclinic-cum-maternity centre in an East Delhi locality with five other doctors. A child died at the clinic earlier this year,allegedly due to wrong treatment. While the doctors refused to own up to their fault,the father lodged a complaint with the Delhi Medical Council (DMC).
DMC,which had no clue about the way this clinic was being run till this complaint reached them,initiated an inquiry and found out that all the doctors,including Khan,had medical degrees only for practising Unani system of treatment but were still functioning as Allopathic doctors.
Not only this,the clinic was not even registered under the Act and Khan was running the medical termination of pregnancy centre without a licence.
The Council registered a case against Khan under the DMC Act and also referred the matter to the police for launching criminal prosecution against the doctors. An FIR for causing death by rash and negligent act (Section 304-A) was subsequently lodged on the complaint of the childs father and based on the evidence collected by the DMC.
Fearing his arrest,Khan rushed to the High Court and pleaded that since the maximum punishment under both the cases was three years in jail,he should be granted anticipatory bail so that the police could not arrest him. His lawyer further argued that the prosecution was yet to prove its case and that Section 304-A was a bailable offence.
The issue is not whether the punishment of offence under DMC Act is three years or two years… If a Unani doctor,considered saviour of the life of the people,starts giving Allopathic medicines,fully knowing that he was not competent to prescribe those medicines,acts as a butcher instead of acting as a doctor, Justice Dhingra said.
The court further said the case could not be construed as a single incident,as it had not been ascertained how many more persons were administered wrong medicines by Khan.
Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram
