The Supreme Court of India has quashed the charge of culpable homicide (Section 304 Part I of the Indian Penal Code) against a doctor who allegedly instructed a nurse over the phone to administer an injection, which led to the patient’s death due to an adverse reaction. However, the court has directed the trial to proceed under Section 304A IPC (death due to negligence).
Key Highlights of the Judgment
The doctor was initially charged under Section 304 Part I IPC, which carries a maximum punishment of ten years in prison.
The Supreme Court ruled that the charge should instead be under Section 304A IPC, which applies to cases of death caused by rash or negligent acts, carrying a maximum sentence of two years.
The decision aligns with the precedent set in the case of Jacob Mathew v. State of Punjab & Another (2005) 6 SCC 1, where medical negligence was distinguished from culpable homicide.
The court also noted that the High Court had already quashed charges against the nurse who administered the injection.
Background of the Case
The case revolved around a doctor's alleged negligence. The prosecution claimed that the doctor instructed a nurse over a phone call to administer an injection to a patient. Unfortunately, the patient suffered an adverse reaction and later died. Based on this, the police charged the doctor under Section 304 Part I IPC (culpable homicide not amounting to murder).
However, the defense argued that the doctor’s action did not amount to culpable homicide but was instead a case of medical negligence, which falls under Section 304A IPC.
The case was initially heard in the High Court of Madras, which refused to quash the culpable homicide charge against the doctor. This prompted the doctor to appeal to the Supreme Court of India.
The Supreme Court carefully reviewed the case and agreed with the doctor’s argument that the offense should be considered medical negligence rather than culpable homicide.
The Court stated:
"The registration of the FIR under Section 304 Part I IPC and the subsequent submission of a police report under Section 173(2) CrPC also under Section 304 Part I IPC cannot be sustained."
The court further emphasized that the nurse who administered the injection had already been discharged from the case by the High Court, citing the Jacob Mathew case.
Read Also:- Supreme Court Criticizes Gwalior Municipal Corporation for Restricting Tender to Foreign Companies
Considering these points, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the appellant and passed the following judgment:
- The culpable homicide charge (Section 304 Part I IPC) was quashed.
- The trial court was directed to proceed with the case under Section 304A IPC (death by negligence).
- The Sessions Judge was instructed to transfer the case records to the appropriate magistrate for further proceedings.
The bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta concluded the hearing by stating:
"We accordingly allow the appeal, quash the impugned order(s), and direct the Trial Court to waive the accusation under Section 304 Part I IPC. The Sessions Judge will transmit the record to the Competent Magistrate assigned to deal with such matters for proceeding further with the trial."
This ruling reinforces the legal principle that medical negligence should not be equated with culpable homicide unless there is clear intent or extreme recklessness. It also highlights the importance of distinguishing between professional negligence and criminal liability in medical cases.
Case Title: Dr. Mohan vs. The State of Tamil Nadu & Anr.
