Supreme Court: How to appreciate evidence if there is contradiction in injuries found by doctor who examined victim first and doctor who examined him subsequently

 The prosecution examined PW8-Dr. Sarika Gadekar at Exhibit-108 who medically treated the injured-PW1 at MGM Hospital, Aurangabad on 11.06.2014. The PW8 deposed that PW1-Sikandar Baig narrated the history of the assault to his right eye and she found extra ocular movement restricted in all directions and the injured PW1 was diagnosed with "Traumatic Neuropathy" and was hospitalised w.e.f. 11.06.2014 to 16.06.2014. As per the evidence of PW8 at the time of admission injured PW1-Sikandar, one Medical Officer Dr. Mantra in OPD examined and noted four injuries i.e. 1) contusion on right eye, 2) abrasion on right clavicle 4x1 c.m., 3) abrasion on right clavicle 3x1 c.m. and 4) contusion on right forearm. However, the prosecution has not examined Dr. Mantra who initially examined the injured in MGM, Hospital so also no any X-ray, report of CT scan is produced on record to support the MLC certificate and only contusion injury was found on shoulder and black eye. So also the injuries which have been noticed by Dr. Mantra are different to the injuries which have been found by the Medical Officer PW7 who had firstly examined the injured. As per the evidence of PW1, he was unconscious soon after the incident and he was taken to MGM Hospital, Aurangabad, however, the discharge summary card of the injured-PW1 does not disclose history of unconsciousness of the injured PW1. Therefore, it appears that there is variance in the oral as well as MLC certificates. {Para 21}

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY (AURANGABAD BENCH)

Criminal Appeal No. 276 of 2020 

Decided On: 02.03.2023

Sikandar Baig Amin Baig Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

Vibha Kankanwadi and Y.G. Khobragade, JJ.

Author: Y.G. Khobragade, J.

Citation: 2023 All M R (Cri.) 1414, MANU/MH/1866/2023.

Read full judgment here: Click here.

Print Page