Diagnostic Centre Appeals Against Licence Cancellation
Earlier, a single judge had upheld the proceedings issued by the district-level advisory committee cancelling the licence of the diagnostic centre
Hyderabad: A two-judge panel of the Telangana High Court admitted a writ appeal challenging cancellation of licence of Sri Lakshmi Narasimha Swamy (SLNS) Diagnostic Centre following allegations of illegal abortions at a private hospital. The panel comprising Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice G.M. Mohiuddin was dealing with an appeal filed by diagnostic centre.
Earlier, a single judge had upheld the proceedings issued by the district-level advisory committee cancelling the licence of the diagnostic centre. The cancellation was ordered following proceedings initiated on the basis of a criminal case registered under the Clinical Establishments Act and the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (PC&PNDT) Act, 1994, and other penal provisions. It was the case of the appellant that the diagnostic centre was being run by its managing director, a qualified radiologist duly registered with the Telangana Medical Council and had no connection with the alleged illegal abortions said to have taken place at a private hospital. It was contended that no request for sex determination was ever made at the appellant’s diagnostic centre and that the authorities proceeded on the basis of the FIR without establishing any direct involvement.
Counsel for the appellant contended that though explanations were submitted in response to showcause notices, copies of the inquiry report and other relied-upon materials were not furnished, thereby violating principles of natural justice. He would contended that mere registration of a criminal case could not form the basis for cancellation of registration. Hearing the appeal, the panel observed that the order cancelling registration was stated to have been passed based on the recommendation of the district level advisory committee after examining the explanation of petitioner along with the enquiry report.
However, the report or minutes containing the recommendation of the advisory committee were not placed on record before the court. Counsel representing state sought time to produce the report and minutes of the advisory committee proceedings.
HC hears case on death for murder convict
The Telangana High Court will continue to hear proceedings qua confirmation of death sentence awarded to a 22-year-old in a 2011 murder case. The panel comprising Justice K. Lakshman and Justice B.R. Madhusudhan Rao was dealing with referred trial filed by the state against Karan Singh, the accused. The reference arose from the judgment of the Sessions Court, Medchal-Malkajgiri, at Kukatpally, relating to a crime registered by the Sanathnagar police. The trial court convicted the accused of murder and sentenced him to death by hanging, holding that the case fell within the “rarest of rare” category. According to the prosecution, on July 18, 2011, the convict, a blacksmith from Bidar, allegedly stabbed a woman multiple times. A police constable, a scrap shop owner, and an autorickshaw stand worker deposed that they witnessed the attack. They identified the accused in court. When they attempted to intervene, the accused allegedly threw stones at them and fled the scene.
The victim was reportedly found unclothed with multiple stab injuries to vital parts of her body, along with bite marks and abrasions, and was declared dead before medical assistance could be provided. It was pointed out that medical evidence confirmed that the death resulted from multiple deep stab wounds consistent with the weapon recovered during the investigation.
The police stated that a blood-stained knife and clothing were recovered at the instance of the accused, along with other material evidence from the scene. It was argued that no specific motive was established; the Sessions Court held that proof of motive was not indispensable in light of the direct eyewitness testimony and the corroborative medical and recovery evidence. Observing the extreme brutality of the offence and taking note of the alleged involvement of accused in prior criminal cases, the trial court concluded that the case warranted the imposition of the death penalty. As mandated under law, the matter is now placed before the High Court for confirmation of the capital sentence. The panel will independently assess the conviction and sentence before passing further orders.