Twitter
Advertisement

Bombay High Court quashes prosecution under PCPNDT Act against two radiologists

The doctors had initially moved the Pune sessions court, challenging the prosecution and seeking that it be quashed and set aside. After their plea was turned down, they moved the HC.

Latest News
article-main
FacebookTwitterWhatsappLinkedin

In a major relief to visiting radiologists at nursing homes and genetic centres, the Bombay High Court has ruled that it is not the duty of a radiologist to maintain details in Form F. It is pure clerical work which is required to be done by the clinic, and the doctor can't be prosecuted for non-maintenance of details in the form, the court observed while quashing a criminal complaint against two radiologists.

Justice ML Tahilyani, in his nine-page order, while quashing the prosecution initiated against two Pune doctors, Dr Ranjeet Ghatge and Dr Sanjay Kadyan, charged under section 25 and rule 9 (4) of the Pre-Conception Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques Act, said, "In my opinion, they cannot be prosecuted for not maintaining particular record, which is required to be maintained by the genetic clinic."

Ghatge was a visiting radiologist at Dr Purohit Nursing Home, Pune, while Kadyan used to work as a visiting radiologist at Dr Kashyap Nursing Home, Pune. They were booked by the authorities after several irregularities were found in the record maintained in Form F at the two nursing homes.

The doctors had initially moved the Pune sessions court, challenging the prosecution and seeking that it be quashed and set aside. After their plea was turned down, they moved the HC.

Counsel Niranjan Mundargi and advocates Rajeev Chavan and Amit Karkhanis, appearing for the doctors, argued, "The main accused, who were running the genetic centres, in both cases have been discharged by the trial court. It is not clear from the complaint whether the complete record of the genetic centre was taken by the authorities; whether any other hard copies of the sonography were found and whether all USG reports were examined to determine that the doctors had not maintained USG reports of the particular patient."

The judge, after examining the rules and the Act, noted, "Minute details mentioned in Form F are, in my opinion, to be filled by the staff members of the clinic. The person/doctor conducting ultrasonography on a pregnant woman will keep complete record of the ultrasonography done by him and not the details of Form F."

Find your daily dose of news & explainers in your WhatsApp. Stay updated, Stay informed-  Follow DNA on WhatsApp.
Advertisement

Live tv

Advertisement
Advertisement