In a petition filed before the Delhi High Court under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), to quash a First Information Report (FIR), a Single Judge Bench of Justice Ajay Digpaul considered the settlement between the parties and quashed the FIR, provided that the petitioner performs community service for a month.
The FIR in the present matter was lodged for offences punishable under Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC), and Section 4 of the Medicare Service Persons and Medicare Service Institutions (Prevention of Violence and Damage of Property) Act, 2008.
On 26-07-2019, the attendant of a patient (petitioner) created chaos in the hospital by physically assaulting the doctor on duty (respondent 2) and involving others who also abused the hospital staff. This resulted in lodging of the said FIR.
The petitioner mentioned that the parties had resolved their disputes and submitted a settlement deed dated 08-01-2025, by which the doctor on duty agreed to withdraw the case against the petitioner. When asked, the doctor on duty stated that he had entered into a compromise without any pressure and of his own free will.
The Court considered the settlement and noted that no grievous injuries were caused. However, the Court also stated that it could not lose sight of the fact that assault on medical professionals in hospitals not only endangers the life of doctors and staff, but also jeopardises the treatment of other patients in need of urgent care.
Hence, the Court quashed the FIR as well as the proceedings in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303. However, the FIR was quashed, subject to the petitioner performing community service on every weekend for one month at Dr. Sushma Jindal Hospital, New Delhi, under the supervision of respondent 2.
The Court further directed the Medical Superintendent of the Hospital to issue a certificate of completion to the petitioner, which would be filed with the Registry. It was also directed that, in case of any absenteeism, default, or misconduct by the petitioner, information must be provided to the Court, which would lead to the passing of appropriate orders, including the revival of the FIR.
Appearances:
For Petitioner – Adv Vijay Singh Kardam
For Respondent(s) – APP Meenakshi Dahiya
