Crux: In this present judgment by the Court, the nurse lodged a false molestation complaint against the doctor after he rebuked her for allowing her relatives to stay in the rooms of the state-run health facility.
DATE OF JUDGEMENT: 12th March, 2021
PARTIES
- Hospital Staff Nurse (not named) (Plaintiff)
- Dr Ashok Chaudhary (Respondent)
SUBJECT: In this present judgment by the Court, the nurse lodged a false molestation complaint against the doctor after he rebuked her for allowing her relatives to stay in the rooms of the state-run health facility.
AN OVERVIEW
(i) In the present case, Dr Ashok Chaudhary, in-charge superintendent of the Community Health Centre (CHC) in Suigam in Gujarat’s Banaskantha district, was booked for molestation after the staff nurse, on December 12, 2019, alleged that he put his hands on her shoulders, and abused and threatened her.
(ii) As reported by the News media, the Court, after the trial, the concluded that molestation allegation levelled by the nurse was false. She let her relatives sleep in rooms of the CHC and when Chaudhary discovered it, he reprimanded her. Hence, she decided to teach him a lesson by filing a false molestation case against him.
IMPORTANT PROVISIONS
Constitution of India
- Article 226 - Power of High Courts to issue certain writs. – (1) Notwithstanding anything in article 32, every High Court shall have power, throughout the territories in relation to which it exercises jurisdiction, to issue to any person or authority, including in appropriate cases any Government, within those territories directions, orders or writs, including writs in the nature of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto and certiorari, or any of them or the enforcement of any of the rights conferred by Part III and for any other purpose. (2) The power conferred on a High Court by clause (1) shall not be in derogation of the power conferred on the Supreme Court by clause (2) of article 32.
Criminal Procedure Code
- Section 154(1) - FIR is a document that places on record the victim's side of the story. FIR acts as a tool on which police authorities’ base and start their investigations
ISSUES
Instituting fake prosecution of molestation in opposition to the medical professional
ANALYSIS OF THE JUDGEMENT
- Here, the Court observed that, it appears that the complainant has misused the law for protection of women and it is necessary to stop such people from misusing the law.
- Furthermore, the Court ordered the nurse to pay a compensation of Rs 10,000 to the senior doctor for inflicting “mental, physical and social harassment” on him by filing the fake case.
- The court consequently noted that if she fails to pay the compensation amount to the doctor within a month, she’ll be imprisoned for 30 days.
- Furthermore, during the trial, the Court also found that the nurse was discouraging patients from getting treatment at the state-run facility and redirecting them to private facilities.
- During the trial, it was discovered that, she let her relatives sleep in rooms of the CHC and when Chaudhary discovered it, he reprimanded her. Hence, she decided to teach him a lesson by filing a false molestation case against him.
- Therefore, keeping in mind that her actions were “dangerous for social health”, the court directed the health commissioner to conduct an inquiry and take appropriate action against the nurse.
- It was furthermore stated by the Court that, it appears that the complainant has misused the law for protection of women and it is necessary to stop such people from misusing the law.
- Immediately after the trial, the Court concluded that no evidence came on document that the health care provider touched her, used abusive language or criminally intimidated her.
- In furtherance, it was concluded that considering that the nurse feared that the physician could possibly report her steps to the top-quality officers and that he had presently rebuked her for permitting her relations sleep in CHC, she submitted the grievance to instruct a lesson to her excellent. Concluding, the complainant’s act is perilous for social wellbeing.
CONCLUSION
In this case, viewers may ask certain questions like, a financial penalty of Rs. 10,000 may prick the false accuser nurse for sometime, however, will that really be a deterrent for her not to misuse women centric laws again? Who will pay for the dignity lost for male doctor? Who will compensate state for the time spent by police in such a frivolous case? When name of the man can be made public even before any charges proven, why can’t court permit names of such false accuser women to be revealed as well?
After the trial was held, soon after obtaining the molestation fees untrue, the Court has in addition ordered the police to lodge an FIR from the nurse for instituting fake prosecution in opposition to the medical professional. Furthermore, the Court has also directed the commissioner of wellbeing for a departmental inquiry and action from the nurse.
