Nagpur, October 9: In a significant relief to three medical practitioners from Yavatmal, the Bombay High Court (Nagpur Bench) on Thursday quashed an FIR and charge sheet filed against them under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO) and Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). The case had attracted attention as it questioned whether doctors could be held criminally liable for not reporting an alleged sexual assault when they had no clear knowledge of it.
Background
The controversy began when a minor girl from Pusad, Yavatmal, engaged to her cousin in late 2024, became pregnant following repeated sexual relations forced upon her. In April 2025, after suffering health complications, she was taken to local doctors for treatment. Dr. Vidya Rathod conducted a pregnancy test, while Dr. Sneha Kadam carried out sonography and handed the report to Dr. Anil Rathod. The medical records confirmed pregnancy.
The police later booked the three doctors, accusing them of failing to report the sexual offence to authorities as mandated under Section 19 of POCSO. They were also charged under provisions of the newly introduced BNS.
Court's Observations
The bench of Justices Nandesh S. Deshpande and Urmila Joshi-Phalke carefully reviewed the FIR, charge sheet, and arguments from both sides. Senior Advocate Firdos Mirza, appearing for the doctors, argued that the medical professionals had only discharged their duties and had no knowledge of the girl’s age or the circumstances leading to the pregnancy.
"Continuing criminal proceedings against them would amount to abuse of process," he submitted.
The State and the victim's counsel opposed, stressing that doctors had a legal obligation to inform police once they suspected sexual abuse of a minor. They pointed to hospital registers and sonography records as supporting material.
However, the judges relied on a Supreme Court precedent in SR Tessy Jose vs State of Kerala (2018), where it was clarified that doctors cannot be held criminally liable unless they had clear "knowledge" of a sexual offence. The High Court echoed that reasoning, noting:
"The requirement of knowledge cannot be stretched to mean that doctors must deduce a minor's age or investigate circumstances of pregnancy. They were performing their professional duty."
Read also:- Supreme Court Clears Path for Judicial Officers to Compete in District Judge Direct Recruitment Exams
The bench further added,
"If Section 19 is interpreted in such a fashion, it would have disastrous consequences, discouraging doctors from performing their duties diligently."
Decision
Concluding that there was no evidence to show the doctors had knowledge or reason to believe a sexual offence was committed, the court quashed FIR No. 0259/2025 and Charge Sheet No. 451/2025 filed at Pusad City Police Station.
The judgment makes it clear that medical professionals cannot be dragged into criminal cases merely for treating patients, unless there is direct evidence of their knowledge of an offence.
With this, all three applications filed by the doctors Anil Rathod, Vidya Rathod, and Sneha Kadam were allowed, and the proceedings against them set aside.
Case Title: Sneha Nakul Kadam vs State of Maharashtra
