Premium
This is an archive article published on October 22, 2013

Government asked to explore possibility of videographing postmortem

The court said it was obligated to protect those who fearlessly stand by truth by law.

A court in New delhi has asked the Delhi government to explore the possibility of videographing post mortem procedure and directed it to take action against two doctors for giving false autopsy report and pressurising their juniors in an alleged murder case.

“I may observe that videography and photography of the entire postmortem examination proceedings would go a long way in bringing about transparency and ruling out any possibility of foul play which may be suspected or alleged. This latest

technology has been successfully used in many of the cases and is extremely helpful… I therefore direct that a copy of this order be also placed before the Principal Secretary (Home),GNCT of Delhi so as to explore the possibility of having the proceedings of postmortem examination videographed in all cases relating to homicidal deaths which is the standard procedure adopted world over and for taking necessary steps in this regard under intimation to this court,” Additional Sessions Judge Kamini Lau said.

The court asked the government to take action against Dr Suresh Seth,Deputy Medical Superintendent of Babu Jagjivan Ram (BJRM) Hospital,and autopsy surgeon Dr Sudesh,currently lodged in judicial custody in a corruption and cheating case,for giving false autopsy report of a woman by making it an unnatural death though it was a natural death and pressurising juniors.

“The conduct of Dr Suresh who is the controlling authority and the officer who allegedly exerted pressure on committee members to save Dr Sudesh and so also the conduct of the Dr Sudesh is directed to be placed before the Principal Secretary (Health & family Welfare) and Director,Directorate of Health Services,GNCT of Delhi for information and appropriate action against them in accordance with the procedure established by law under intimation to this court,” it said.

The court directed Delhi government to ensure that BJMR Hospital’s Dr Bhim Singh and his team including Dr Javed and Dr Sameer,who exposed the misdoings of their department,are not put to any kind of harassment by authorities.

The court made the observations while deciding the murder case in which a youth,his mother and sister were accused of killing the woman,trespassing her house,hurting and molesting her daughter-in-law last year in Jahangirpuri in Delhi.

Story continues below this ad

The trio was acquitted of murder charge. Santosh and her daughter Reena were convicted for trespass and causing hurt to the victim Premwati’s daughter-in-law and were released on probation by the court.

Ashwani was sentenced to two years for molesting the daughter-in-law after trespassing her house.

Premwati was taken to BJRM hospital where she died and her postmortem was conducted by Dr Sudesh who showed the cause of death as unnatural and result of assault.

The court,however,rejected his autopsy report saying it was “unreliable and incorrect” and said it does not co-relate to the findings given in the medical report by the first doctor who had treated Premwati.

Story continues below this ad

“The cause and manner of death and evaluation of the deceased is totally inaccurate. For someone whose cause of death was natural,Dr Sudesh instead showed the same as unnatural and homicidal (result of assault). This is highly criminal and cannot be taken as an innocent mistake… In this case the possibility of Dr Sudesh having deliberately changed the cause and manner of death and the nature of injuries cannot be ruled out,” the judge said.

The court said Dr Suresh had pressurised the committee members who were probing his misdeeds for not taking action against Sudesh citing the reason of hospital’s reputation.

Their misdeeds,however,were exposed by the head of the committee Dr Bhim Singh and its members Dr Javed and Dr Sameer who had explained in the court about the pressure exercised in them by Dr Suresh.

The court said it was under obligation to ensure that those who fearlessly stand by truth are protected by law and unless this is done no person would dare to stand up against those who are dishonest and corrupt.

Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram

Latest Comment
Post Comment
Read Comments
Advertisement
Advertisement
Loading Taboola...
Advertisement