Postmortems being conducted by students in several medical colleges! High Court slams doctors for negligence in postmortem procedures
Chandigarh: Highlighting the carelessness on the part of the doctors in conducting post-mortems, which in turn obstructs the possibility of a fair trial, the Punjab and Haryana High Court recently asked State Government authorities to respond to the same.
Referring to the instances where the dissection of the body is often done by persons other than Doctors/Forensic Experts in the mortuary room, the HC bench of Justice N.S. Shekhawat observed that due to these factors, the postmortem reports do not accurately reflect the findings as found on the body.
“Not only this, in several medical colleges, the postmortems are conducted by the students, who are less experienced and the dissection is performed unscientifically without following the scientific methods. Some times, even the forensic experts/senior doctors do not attend the process of conducting the postmortem and the postmortem reports are prepared in routine. Apart from that, in few cases, at a later stage, the medical opinions are changed during the course of trial and in absence of proper videography or photographs doubts are raised with regard to the contents of the postmortem reports,” the bench observed.
Therefore, the Court impleaded the Secretaries of the Punjab, Haryana, and Chandigarh Health Department, asking them to file their affidavits before the next date of hearing on 27.09.2024.
These observations were made by the HC bench while considering a revision plea in a culpable homicide not amounting to murder. During the proceedings, the counsel for the petitioners pointed it out to the Court that as per the report dated 21.01.2023, the doctors could not declare the cause of death of the victim.
Taking note of this submission and the postmortem report, the HC bench observed that the report mentioned that the cause of death would be given after receiving the chemical examiner report.
“However, surprisingly, after the receipt of chemical examiner report, it has been mentioned that the injuries suffered by the deceased were neither grievous nor life threatening and the cause of death could not be declared in the present case. It clearly shows that the postmortem examination was done in a very casual manner and due to the said fact, even the investigation could not be conducted properly in the present case,” noted the Court.
“Even this Court has noticed in several cases that the investigation could not be conducted in criminal matters, in absence of proper medical evidence. Thus, not only the victim of crime suffers, but the accused is also deprived of a fair trial. This case is one of the most conspicuous example of gross negligence on the part of the doctors of the medical board,” it further observed.
Highlighting the importance of postmortem reports/MLRs in deciding the cause of death, the Court noted,
“the postmortem reports/MLRs are very crucial to decide the cause of death, the injuries found on the body and to determine as to whether any poisoning was there or not. It is one of the most vital piece of evidence for criminal justice delivery system. The evidence of doctor based on medico legal report/postmortem report is the foundation of criminal trial, where injuries have been caused to some person, suicides, cases of poisoning etc. Even the Courts formally place huge reliance on such witnesses, as they are the experts in their field and based on their evidence only, the criminal trial are decided. Consequently, this Court is conscious of the importance of medical evidence in the disposal of criminal trial by the Courts at different levels. However, sadly nowadays, it has been noticed and it is a matter of common knowledge that the dissection of the body is being done by persons other than Doctors/Forensic Experts in mortuary room. Due to this, the postmortem reports do not accurately reflect the findings as found on the body.”
Therefore, the Court impleaded the State/UT Health Department authorities asking them to submit their affidavits in the matter. “Before proceeding any further, to lay down the procedure with regard to the conducting of postmortem examinations, which may be followed by the doctors/forensic experts, it would be appropriate to implead the Secretaries, Department of Health and Family Welfare of the State of Punjab, Haryana, Union Territory of Chandigarh as respondents Nos. 3 to 5, respectively. The Registry of this Court is directed to carry out necessary corrections in the memo of parties in this regard. Respondents No. 3 to 5 may also file their respective affidavits on or before the next date of hearing,” ordered the Court.
To view the Court order, click on the link below:
https://medicaldialogues.in/pdf_upload/punjab-haryana-hc-251230.pdf
Also Read: No need to examine doctor if genuineness of postmortem report is unchallenged: Orissa HC
