This particular case underwent autopsy at Calicut Medical college during the year 2004.The deceased was a 30-35 yr old female admitted at district hospital Calicut for elective tubal ligation. The surgery was over & later on she was referred to IMCH,Calicut for expert management. Subsequently she died. The autopsy was conducted by Dr.Ajay under my supervision. We were able to notice a handful collection of purulent blood stained fluid in the pelvic cavity. The internal organs showed petechiae with congestion. Histopatholgical examination of the internal organs revealed some findings in favor of septicaemia. The opinion was given as "the possibility of death due to septicaemia could not be ruled out." The HOD was very much vehement to forward the certificate to concerned court & police& asked me to change the opinion as the deceased died of dehydration. I said no & later informed me that the opinion of the HOD will be tagged along with the certificate. She also harassed the DMO,Calicut ,who happened to be my friend. The DYSP Calicut harassed me during my working at Medical college,Trichur & after retirement. I gave a statement to the above DYSP with regard to her death & at that time he was made aware that for want of nothing the HOD instigated all the untoward events.According to him out of professional jealousy all these misfortune happened. The HOD also brain washed the husband of the deceased to make him believe that the doctor who attended his wife did not give treatment in time & the doctors who conducted the autopsy were not able to find out the exact cause of death. I came to know recently that there is a move to sue the doctors concerned with this case in court of law.
The case came before sub judge Calicut three years ago. The HOD was not able to withstand the cross examination because of lack of clinical exposure. The complainant himself submitted before the Hon judge that "I AM WITHDRAWING MY CASE" & no harm should come for the HOD.
My comment TRUTH ALWAYS PREVAILS
The case came before sub judge Calicut three years ago. The HOD was not able to withstand the cross examination because of lack of clinical exposure. The complainant himself submitted before the Hon judge that "I AM WITHDRAWING MY CASE" & no harm should come for the HOD.
My comment TRUTH ALWAYS PREVAILS