The Kerala High Court refused to quash a case against a doctor accused of pressing a patient’s breasts during a Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) procedure. The court stated that a woman can usually tell the difference between a doctor’s professional actions and inappropriate behavior. The doctor had sought dismissal of the case, but the court ruled that the allegations need proper legal examination.
The Kerala High Court declined to dismiss a case against a doctor accused of outraging a woman’s modesty under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The charges stem from allegations that he pressed her breasts with sexual intent during a medical termination of pregnancy (MTP) procedure.
Justice G. Girish, presiding over the case, dismissed the petition filed by Dr. G. Haridas under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.PC), stating that,
“It is a matter to be dealt with by the Trial Court while evaluating the evidence adduced by the prosecution.”
The case arose from a complaint lodged on September 8, 2017, by the husband of a 29-year-old woman who underwent an MTP procedure at Malabar Medical College on September 2, 2017. The woman alleged that the gynecologist inappropriately pressed her breasts and hugged her during the procedure with sexual intent.
Also Read: Punjab Pastor Bajinder Singh From Viral ‘Yeshu Yeshu’ Video Faces Sexual Harassment Case
Afterward, she confided in her husband about the incident, expressing her reluctance to consult the doctor again, which led him to file the complaint.
Dr. Haridas argued that the allegations were unfounded and resulted from a misunderstanding of medical practices. He contended that his actions were part of a legitimate medical examination during the MTP procedure and that the complainant had misinterpreted them.
Witnesses present in the labor room, including nurses and house surgeons, did not corroborate the claims of misconduct.
However, some witnesses acknowledged seeing the doctor examine the patient’s breasts and ask whether she was still breastfeeding. According to one witness, the doctor’s actions could have been for medical reasons, especially if the patient had complained of pain or swelling.
The prosecution opposed the request to quash the plea, noting that the victim’s discomfort and subsequent refusal to consult the doctor again indicated inappropriate behavior. They argued that the truth of the allegations should be determined through a trial rather than dismissed at an early stage.
The court remarked that while the doctor’s actions might be framed as part of medical protocol, a reasonable woman could distinguish between professional conduct and actions motivated by sexual intent.
The court stated,
“If the above act on the part of the petitioner was in response to a complaint by the patient about swelling or pain on her breasts, she would not have complained about the same to her husband and refused to meet the petitioner for the next consultation… normally a woman of ordinary prudence would be able to identify the violations made upon her body with lascivious motives, and other innocuous touches or advances, whether it be as part of treatment protocol or otherwise,”
Also Read: Sexual Harassment Case Against Former WFI Chief: Court’s Verdict Expected on May 20
The court concluded that the evidence gathered during the investigation, including witness statements, was sufficient to substantiate the charges under Section 354 IPC against the petitioner.
Ultimately, the court dismissed the petition, emphasizing that it was not within its authority under Section 482 Cr.PC to evaluate the reliability of the evidence or dismiss the case without a trial.
Case Title: Dr G. Haridas v State of Kerala [CRL.MC NO. 2527 OF 2018]
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
