LexJUGGANKHAN versus STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
.JUGGANKHAN v. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH August 10, 1964 lK. SUBBA RAO AND S. M. Sllll JI.) CrimlMJ Law-Pouonoiu medicine-Prescription without stud1~ possible efiect-lf rash and negligent act-Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860) s. 304A. Lured by a pamphlet advertising that, among other things, the a~ lant, a registered Homoeopathic medical practitioner, treated Naru (Guinea Worm), one D went to the clinic of the appellant. The appellant cu- mined D and administered 24 drops of suamonium and a leaf of dhatura. After taking the medicine D started feeling restless "lid ill, varlow antidOtes were given but she was not relieved. She vomited twiC<I but the vomits were not preserved and sent for eumination. Ultimately in the evening she died. The autopsy surgeon reported that the cause of the death could be ascertained only after the result of the chemical analy- sia was received and he sent to the chemical examiner the stomach with its contents and pieceo of liver, spleen and kidney. The Chemical Exa- miner reported that no poison could be detected in any of these items. The appellant's contention that it has not been proved that death rCllu1ted from dhatura poisoning was negatived by both courts below, and die High Court confirmed his conviction under s. 302, Indian Penal Code. On appeal by special leave HELD : (i) On the facts the conclusion of the courta below that dciath was the.result of Dhatura poison could not be '"id lo be erroneow. [160] (ii) The appellant was guilty under s. 304A, Indian Penal Code. On the facts, s. 299, Indian Penal Code, did not ap;ily and the appellant - be acquitted of the charge under s. 302, Indian Penal Code. [I 9C] It seems that the appellant _prescribed the medicine without thorouPJy studying what would be the effect of giving 24 drops of stramonium a a leaf of dhqtura. It is a rash and negligent act to prescribe poiaoaoos medicines without studying their possible efl'ecL [I SH] John Oni A.kerele v. The King A.I.R. 1943 P.C. 72, distinpiilh- ed. C!tIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 171 of 1962. A B c D E F Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated May 10, t 962 of the Madhya Prad~ High Court Indore Bench G at Indore in Criminal Appeal No. 344 • oi 1961. S. Mohan Kumaramanga/am, M. K. Ramamurthi, R. K. a.,, D. P. Singh and S. C. Agarwal, for the appellant. I. N. Shroff, for the respondent The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Slbl J. This is an appeal by special leave directed .against the judgment of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh eon- H • • ' JUGGAN.KHAN V. STATE (Sikri /.) 15 A finning the conviction and sentence of the appellant under s. 302, I.P.C. The case of the prosecution, in brief, which has been accept- ed both by the Sessions Judge and the High Court, is as follows. ·The appellant is a registered Homoeopathic medical practitioner B under Madhya Pradesh Homoeopathic and Bi<rchemic Practi- tioners Act (Madhya Pradesh Act 26 of 1951). In about May 1960, he started residing and practising at Akodiya' Mandi. He issued a pamphlet advertising that, among other things, he treated Naru (guinea wonn). Lurlld by this, Smt. Deobi, aged about 20 years, who had been suffering from C guinea wonn for six weeks, accompanied by her uncle Chisaji (P.W. 3), mother Daryaobai _(P.W. 4) and aunt Guiab Bai (P. W. 6) went to the clinic of the appellant on May 30, 1961, at about 8 a.m. She was examined by the appellant and adminis- tered 24 drops of mother pncture stramonium and a leaf of D dhatura. After taking this medicine she started feeling restleas and ill; various antidotes were given but she was not relieved. She vomited twice but the vomits were not preserved and sent for examination to the chemiCal examiner. Ultimately at aboot 5 p.m. she died. Dr. Patodia (P.W. 7) perfonned the autopsy .on May 31, E 1961, and reported that the cause of death could be ascertained only after the result of chemical analysis. is received. He sent to the chemical examiner the stomach with its contents and· pieces of liver, spleen and kidney. The chemical examiner, however, reported that no poison could be detected in any of these items. This is seized by the learned coun8el for the appellant and he has F urged that it :llllS _not been proved that death resulted from Dhatura poisoning. But both the courts below have found against him. He further urges that what was administered wa
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.