On 18th March,The Kerala High Court upheld a protocol mandating that only gynaecologists conduct examinations of sexual assault survivors, dismissing a petition filed by government hospital gynaecologists. This requirement, outlined in Clause 6 of the 2019 Kerala Medico-legal Protocol,
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
Thiruvananthapuram: Yesterday(on18th March),The Kerala High Court has made a significant decision regarding the protocol for the examination of survivors of sexual offences. The court’s decision came in response to a petition filed by a group of gynaecologists from government hospitals across Kerala. These medical professionals challenged a specific protocol that mandates only gynaecologists to conduct examinations on survivors of sexual offences.
Justice Devan Ramachandran presided over the case and, while dismissing the petition, allowed the petitioner-gynaecologists the freedom to present their grievances to the appropriate state authorities. This controversy lies in Clause 6 of the Kerala Medico-legal Protocol for Examination of Survivor of Sexual Offences of 2019 and its subsequent amendment in April 2023. This amendment stipulates that only female gynaecologists can be requested by the police to examine survivors.
ALSO READ: Supreme Court Upholds Centre’s Decision to Classify Medical Devices as ‘Drugs’
The petitioners argue that this requirement contradicts existing laws, specifically pointing out its inconsistency with Section 27(2) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act) and Section 164A of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). They assert that the mandate in Clause 6 does not align with national or international guidelines for attending to survivors of sexual offenses.
The gynaecologists plea emphasizes:
“Hence, it is evident that assigning the task of conducting medico-legal examinations to specific specialists has been counterproductive to the intended objectives of the State and has further strained the obstetrics specialty, compromising its integrity.”
The practical implications of this protocol, the petitioners stated:
“Therefore clearly, entrusting the responsibility of conducting medico-legal examination to a certain kind of specialists has proven to be counterproductive to the actual object sought to be attained by the State and has also resulted in compromising and prejudicing the even otherwise stressed obstetrics specialty.”
Further, they argue that the educational curriculum for medical graduates in India equips all doctors with the necessary knowledge and skills to handle cases of sexual offences, thereby questioning the rationale behind imposing such a burden solely on gynaecologists. This, according to the petitioners, is “illegal, improper, unreasonable, and arbitrary.”
ALSO READ: Orissa High Court Orders Doctors to Use Legible Handwriting for Medical Documents
In their plea, the gynaecologists called for a significant modification of Clause 6, advocating for the responsibility of medical examinations to be extended to “all registered medical practitioners” rather than being limited to gynaecologists. They also demanded that the 2023 amendment be declared unconstitutional and called for the provision of necessary training to all medical practitioners to ensure competent handling of sexual offence cases.
Despite the compelling arguments presented, Justice Devan Ramachandran dismissed the petition but granted the petitioner-gynaecologists the liberty to approach the appropriate State authorities with their grievances, leaving the door open for further dialogue and potential policy revision.
