Ernakulum: The single judge bench of Justice A Badharudeen of the Kerala High Court while discharging the doctor of criminal liability under section 19(1) of the POCSO Act, held that though the doctor has failed to inform the police of pregnancy of a girl aged 17 years within 7.15 hrs as mandated in POCSO act the delay of the doctor was not deliberate. The judge in his order said “In my view, if there is omission even after getting information to report the same to the Police after 24.00 hours atleast, the offence punishable under Section 19(1) of the POCSO Act would get attracted. If the omission is only for a period less than 24.00 hours, similar to 7.15 hours in the present case, fastening criminal culpability on the doctor for the said short omission could not be justified.”
In the present case when the victim, a minor aged 17 years, faced difficulty in urination, as advised by her friend, she reached Lakshmi Meghan Hospital on 21.04.2022, then the doctor therein examined her and found that she was pregnant. The father of the victim, who is responsible for the pregnancy threatened the victim, not to disclose this occurrence and stated that, if so, he would commit suicide. Later, the father took her to Manzoor Hospital, Kanhangad. A doctor examined her and stated that abortion could not be performed therein and directed to go to Mangalapuram. Accordingly, at 11.45 am on 22.04.2022 the victim along with her father reached Bhat’s Nursing Home, Mangalapuram to abort the pregnancy. Then, the accused doctor advised to have blood test and also did see the scan report, suggestive of pregnancy. The victim was admitted in the hospital and a tablet was put on her vagina so as to abort the pregnancy.
The prosecution, the police said that at Lakshmi Meghan Hospital the doctor had conducted scanning test of the minor and according to her, on knowing the pregnancy of the minor, aged 17 years, the same was informed to the Hosdurg Police on 21.04.2022 at about 7.00 pm. Later, when the victim was in Bhat’s Nursing Home on 22.04.2022 the police reached there and brought the victim and father to the police station and FIR was registered on 22.04.2022 itself. The specific allegation against the doctor is that, even after obtaining the scan report and having knowledge regarding pregnancy of the minor victim, the same was not informed by the doctor to the Police and accordingly the doctor is accused of committing offence punishable under Section 19(1) of the POCSO Act.
READ ALSO : Dentist thrashed in south Delhi clinic, one held from Jharkhand
The bench observed that failure to inform the matter within a period of 7.15 hours alone is not sufficient to hold that there was failure to report the same to the police. The bench added that in order to fasten criminal culpability upon a person for failure to report to the Police regarding commission of offence under the POCSO Act and to make omission to report the same, as an offence punishable under Section 19(1) of the POCSO Act, there must be a deliberate omission to be gathered from the records. The bench differentiated doctors from other by giving an instance of a gynaecologist who in its OPD has come across a minor girl who is pregnant and naturally a duty is cast on the gynaecologist to report the pregnancy to police in terms of Section 19(1) of the POCSO Act. However at the same time the gynaecologist gets a call from the ward that a pregnant lady would require urgent caesarean. Hence the gynaecologist primary duty is to attend the said surgery, so as to save the lives of the pregnant lady as well as the child in the womb and there is a complication in the procedure then the first priority of the gynaecologist will be to save the patient and later report the pregnancy of the minor child to the police. Therefore, reasonable time should be given to the doctors to inform such incidents to the police. Viewing the duties of a doctor in this plank, in the instant case, the doctor failed to inform about pregnancy of a minor girl, within a period of 7.15 hours from the time of his knowledge, by the time, police reached the hospital and soon crime was registered. The bench asked a question “In such a case, can criminal culpability to be imposed upon the doctor is the relevant question?” and replied to the said question as definitely ‘no’, because he did not get a reasonable time to inform the matter to the police, since the matter already informed by another doctor and on the said information, police reached the hospital and registered crime. The bench said that in their view if there is omission even after getting information to report the same to the Police after 24.00 hours atleast, the offence punishable under Section 19(1) of the POCSO Act would get attracted. If the omission is only for a period less than 24.00 hours, similar to 7.15 hours in the present case, fastening criminal culpability on the doctor for the said short omission could not be justified. Thus the bench discharged the doctor from criminal liability under Sec 19(2) of POCSO Act.