Ishwar Sao @ Ishwari Kumar @ Ishwar Saw v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25019 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-66 Year-2020 Thana- BARACHATTI District- Gaya ====================================================== ISHWAR SAO @ ISHWARI KUMAR @ ISHWAR SAW S/o Late Babulal Saw Resident of Village- Dhangian, P.S.- Barachatti, District- Gaya. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Raj Dular Sah, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Dr. Mrityunjay Kumar Gautam, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 15-10-2020 Heard Mr. Raj Dular Sah, learned counsel for the petitioner and Dr. Mrityunjay Kumar Gautam, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State through video conferencing.

Petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with Barachatti (Mohanpur) P.S. Case No. 66 of 2020 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 314 and 315/34 of the Indian Penal Code 1860.

The allegation against the petitioner as per the First Information Report is that the informant took his pregnant wife to the clinic of the petitioner as she was having pain in the stomach and the petitioner claiming himself to be a Doctor advised for abortion of her pregnancy. It has further been alleged that during course of treatment, the wife of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25019 of 2020(2) dt.15-10-2020 2/2 informant died in the clinic of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not committed any offence in the manner alleged. Learned counsel further submits that petitioner is Rural Medical Practitioner (RMP) and he did not perform any surgery upon the wife of the informant. Learned counsel also submits that from perusal of the postmortem report, it would be evident that the deceased died due to cardiac arrest.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the materials on record and the fact that there is specific allegation against the petitioner that he treated the wife of the informant without being a qualified doctor to treat such kind of patient, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner stands rejected.

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J) S.Ali/- U T