Bombay High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail to Doctor Accused in Miscarriage and Death Case. Custodial Interrogation Not Required as Investigation Complete and Applicant is Medical Practitioner.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: AURANGABAD In Favour of Accused
  • 166
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The applicant, Dr. Shrihari Limbaji Lahane, is accused no. 2 in Sessions Case No. 170 of 2012 pending before the Additional Sessions Judge, Beed. There are 16 other accused in the case. The allegations against the applicant and other accused are of having committed offences punishable under sections 312, 313, 315, 316, 318, 201, and 304 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) read with section 34 of IPC. The applicant filed an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC). The court considered the submissions of the applicant's advocate, Mr. Joydeep Chatterji, and the APP for the respondent, Mr. S.R. Palnitkar. The court noted that the investigation was complete and the applicant was a medical practitioner. The court held that custodial interrogation of the applicant was not required. The court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant on certain conditions, including that the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence and shall attend the trial regularly.

Headnote

A) Criminal Procedure Code - Anticipatory Bail - Section 438 CrPC - Custodial Interrogation - The applicant, a doctor accused of causing miscarriage and death of a pregnant woman, sought anticipatory bail. The court held that since the investigation was complete and the applicant was a medical practitioner, custodial interrogation was not necessary. Bail granted on conditions. (Paras 1-5)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the applicant, a medical practitioner accused of offences under IPC sections 312, 313, 315, 316, 318, 201, 304 read with 34, is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The application is allowed. The applicant is directed to be released on bail in the event of arrest in connection with Sessions Case No. 170 of 2012 pending before the Additional Sessions Judge, Beed, on executing a personal bond of Rs. 15,000/- with one surety of the like amount. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence and shall attend the trial regularly.

Law Points

  • Anticipatory bail
  • Section 438 CrPC
  • Custodial interrogation
  • Medical practitioner
  • Investigation complete
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2013 LawText (BOM) (12) 26

Criminal Application No. 5016 of 2013

2013-12-05

Abhay M. Thipsay, J.

Mr. Joydeep Chatterji for Applicant, Mr. S.R. Palnitkar APP for Respondent

Dr. Shrihari Limbaji Lahane

The State of Maharashtra

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Criminal application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC.

Remedy Sought

The applicant, accused no. 2 in Sessions Case No. 170 of 2012, sought anticipatory bail to avoid arrest in connection with offences under IPC sections 312, 313, 315, 316, 318, 201, 304 read with 34.

Filing Reason

The applicant apprehended arrest in the said sessions case.

Issues

Whether the applicant is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC.

Submissions/Arguments

Applicant's advocate argued that the applicant is a medical practitioner and custodial interrogation is not required. APP for the respondent opposed the application.

Ratio Decidendi

Custodial interrogation of the applicant, a medical practitioner, is not required as the investigation is complete. Hence, anticipatory bail is granted under Section 438 CrPC.

Judgment Excerpts

The applicant is the accused no.2 in Sessions Case No. 170 of 2012 pending before the Additional Sessions Judge, Beed. The allegation against the applicant and the other accused is of having committed offences punishable under section 312 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) read with section 34 of IPC, section 313 of IPC read with section 34 of IPC, section 315 of IPC read with section 34 of IPC, section 316 of IPC read with section 34 of IPC, section 318 of IPC read with section 34 of IPC, section 201 of IPC read with section 34 of IPC, section 304 of IPC read with section 34 of IPC. The investigation is complete and the applicant is a medical practitioner. Custodial interrogation of the applicant is not required.

Procedural History

The applicant filed Criminal Application No. 5016 of 2013 before the High Court of Judicature of Bombay Bench at Aurangabad seeking anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC in connection with Sessions Case No. 170 of 2012 pending before the Additional Sessions Judge, Beed.

Acts & Sections

  • Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC): 312, 313, 315, 316, 318, 201, 304, 34
  • Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC): 438
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Second Appeal in Property Partition and Possession Dispute — Upholds Concurrent Findings on Title and Adverse Possession. The court held that the registered partition deed of 1961 was valid and that the defendants failed...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Conversion of Industrial Plot to Residential Zone in Town Planning Scheme — Arbitrary Zoning Violates Article 14. Petitioner's plot in I-2 zone surrounded by residential properties; court holds that zoning must be rational ...