No case can be filed without medical certificate – Hon’ble High Court Division.

No case can be filed without medical certificate – Hon’ble High Court Division.
Generally we are learned lawyers under Section A 11(c) or 11(c)/30 of the Women and Child Abuse Prevention Act 2000 (Amended-2003) subsequent to the amendment of 2020. .We file a case with B.B.S. or village doctor’s treatment letter. And there are many precedents where the learned Tribunal has taken cognizance of those cases and sentenced the accused based on the evidence after the trial.
Although the Prevention of Torture against Women and Children Act 2000 (Amended-2003) later amended in 2020 in section 11 (c) it is said that if simple hurt is committed for dowry then the maximum three years and minimum one year and additional fine will be punished. That is, the analysis of this section means that there should be general injury in case of filing a case under section 11(c) or 11(c)/30. And if there is a general injury, a medical certificate is required to support it, otherwise a case will have to be filed under Section 3 of the Dowry Prevention Act of 2018 instead of Section 11(c) or 11(c)/30 of the Prevention of Women and Child Abuse Act.
Further in the Prevention of Violence against Women and Children Act 2000 (Amended-2003) section 32 (1) of the subsequent amendment of 2020 states that the medical examination of the victim of the crime shall go to a government hospital or a private hospital recognized by the government.
Sub-section 2 states that if the crime victim is presented for treatment in the said hospital, the doctor on duty of the hospital will quickly complete the medical examination and issue a medical certificate to the person concerned. And inform the police station about the commission of such crime.
But in practice we do not take into account the general injury mentioned and forget about the article 32 in most of the cases while filing the case. And the learned Tribunal also took cognizance of the case without noticing it.
This time, the High Court Division of the Hon’ble Supreme Court has taken into account the matter and issued a judgment with instructions, and the instructions of that judgment have already been implemented in the learned Women and Child Abuse Prevention Tribunal-1 of Chittagong. I don’t know if it works anywhere else though.
Now coming to the main issue, the incident started with the formation of complaint against the accused in women and children case no. Case No. 4 of Shibganj Police Station dated 01-08-2016 in Shibganj Police Station on the complaint of beating up the victim, the daughter of the plaintiff, along with her husband Utpal Kumar Roy, with her husband Utpal Kumar Roy, for demanding a dowry of Rs. (8) 2016, GR filed Case No. 258/14. Later, after the investigation, when a charge sheet was filed against the accused, the case was registered as Chapainawabganj Wise Women and Child Torture Prevention Tribunal-2 Women and Children Case No. 34/15. The learned counsel of the defendants applied to the Women and Child Torture Prevention Tribunal-2 of Chapainawabganj after analyzing Sections 119(c) and 32 of the Prevention of Women and Child Torture Act, seeking exemption from the liability of the case, then the learned Women and Child Torture Prevention Tribunal-2 rejected the defendants’ application. He filed a complaint on 30-01-2016, then the defendant filed a criminal appeal no. 1660/2016 in the High Court Division challenging the order of complaint. The Hon’ble Court accepted the appeal case on 29-03-2016 and directed the other party to show cause and granted a stay of three months on the proceedings of the lower court case, although the period was later extended.
After a lengthy hearing between the parties in the Division of the Hon’ble High Court, the Hon’ble Court passed the judgment on the said appeal case dated 10-09-2020 and in the judgment gave directions along with the decision that,
The tribunal shall not take cognizance or frame charge of an offense punishable under section 11 (Ga) or 11(Ga)/30 of the Ain, 2000 against an accused without having a medical examination certificate from Government Hospital or any private Hospital, recognized by the Government for that purpose in view of the provision under section 32 of the said Ain in support of simple hurt of the victim’s wife.
For the reasons stated above, we find merit in this appeal which should be allowed
In the result, the appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated
31.1.2016 is set aside. The accused appellants are discharged from the
Allegation and released from their bail bonds
Source:- Hon’ble Supreme Court website.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *