Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi & Ors v. Sudha Devi & Anr

PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.

J.R. MIDHA, J. October 1, 2008 rk

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI Judgment reserved on : September 10, 2008 % Judgment delivered on : October 1, 2008 + RFA 547/2007 GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. ..... Appellants Through: Mrs.Avnish Ahlawat, with Ms.Latika Chaudhary, Advocates VERSUS SUDHA DEVI & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr.M.L. Sharma, Advocate CORAM: Hon'ble Mr.Justice Pradeep Nandrajog Hon'ble Mr.Justice J.R. Midha 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? Yes. 3. Whether judgment should be reported in Digest? Yes. : PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J. 1. Sudha Devi was admitted to the 'Maternity Ward' of G.T.B. Hospital, Shahdara on 7.7.2003 as an expectant mother. A caesarian section had to be performed. A male child was born to her the same day at 2.30 p.m. Needless to state because of the surgery, Sudha Devi was administered pain killers, sedatives and antibiotics which obviously affected her mental alertness. Being a Female Ward, no male members were allowed to stay in the ward. She had no female relatives to look after her and a lady in the neighbourhood, Indu volunteered to give her company in the hospital. 2. At around 4:30 AM on 8.7.2003 the infant was found missing. Obviously the infant had been kidnapped. A FIR under Section 363 IPC, being FIR No.157/2003 was registered with the local police at P.S. Dilshad Garden. The infant could not be found. 3. Sudha Devi sued the hospital authorities as also the Government of NCT Delhi which had established the hospital for damages. She impleaded the Commissioner of Police Delhi as also the Union of India as parties. She claimed Rs.5 lacs as compensation. 4. She succeeded. Vide impugned judgment and decree dated 24.7.2007, holding defendants No.1, 2 & 3, guilty of negligence the suit stands decreed. The Commissioner of Police has been let off on the finding returned that police personnel were posted around the hospital to maintain general law and order and were not charged with the obligation to ensure that only authorized persons enter and exit the hospital. Indeed, the police personnel would have no means to decide or determine as to who should enter the hospital or who should exit the same. 5. The learned Trial Judge has believed the testimony of Sudha Devi who appeared as PW-1 and Indu who appeared as PW-3. 6. In her testimony Indu deposed that her young son was with her at the hospital and at about 4.30 a.m. on the fateful day she had to take him to the toilet. When she returned from the toilet she found that the male child born to Sudha Devi was missing. She stated that the Doctors were informed of the same and a complaint was lodged with the police. She stated that a search was made for the missing infant child but he could not be found. 7. The defence examined Dr. N.K. Sinha, the Additional Medical Superintendent of the hospital as D2/W1. The SHO, P.S. Dilshad Garden was examined as D4/W1. 8. Dr. N.K. Sinha who was not posted at the hospital when the incident took place, being posted at the hospital since November 2005, corroborated Sudha Devi that a male child was born to her after a caesarian section at 2.30 p.m. on 7.7.2003 and she was shifted from the Labour Ward to the General Ward in the evening of 7.7.2003. He stated that the new born child was handed over to the attendant accompanying the patient. He deposed that :- "The female ward is taken care by the professor of Gynae Department. There are security persons deployed in each ward who checked the entry and exit of the patient and their attendant. There is no register maintained as to who has come in Ward No.13 and gone out. It is wrong to suggest that any person can enter in any ward only the authorized persons are permitted to enter by the security staff." 9. D4/W1, SHO of P.S. Dilshad Garden deposed about the registration of the FIR. He stated that he could not furnish the names of the police officers who were deployed at G.T.B. Hospital when the incident took place. 10. Lea