Court No. - 40
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 31712 of 2021 Petitioner :- Hariom Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sharad Malviya,Akshayavar Nath Pandey,Sr. Advocate Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J. Hon'ble Vikram D. Chauhan,J.
It is contended that the fifth respondent, who is a Assistant Professor in respondent no.3 University has operated upon petitioner's brother and inserted a pacemaker, which is of poor quality. According to petitioner, the doctor concerned has committed similar lapses in large number of cases and such facts have also been ascertained by the University, but action is not being taken in the matter.
From the materials placed on record, we find that allegation in the writ petition is against respondent no.5 about deficiency in services rendered to his patient. Such issues can always be got examined in the event appropriate proceedings are instituted before the District Consumer Forum where claim for compensation, made in this petition, can more appropriately be examined after evidence is taken on record. So far as plea of initiation of criminal proceedings are concerned, petitioner may either institute proceedings under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. or file a private criminal complaint. This Court in exercise of writ jurisdiction is not required to examine factual complaints about deficiency in services rendered by a doctor, at the first instance.
Subject to the observations, aforesaid, this petition is disposed off.
Order Date :- 17.12.2021 D. Tamang