STABBING FROM BEHIND

This particular case undergone postmortem examination at CALI CUT Medical college during 2004. Dr.Ajay &myself conducted the autopsy. It was mainly conducted by Dr.Ajay the then PG. I was supervising the same.The deceased underwent elective tubectomyin the district hospital & later referred to IMCH. We were able to notice a handful collection of purulent blood stained fluid in the pelvic cavity. The operated site appeared normal. There were petechiae involving visceral organs. All the internal organs including brain were preserved for histopathological findings.Based upon the clinical,postmortem,& histopathological findings an opinion as to the cause of death was given as "The possibility of death due to septicemia following tubal ligation could not be ruled out".The certificates were placed on the table of HOD for forwarding to the concerned court & police. At that time the remark made by the HOD was" The opinion is not correct. I have perused the records & in my opinion the deceased died of DEHYDRATION & you have to change it!!. I said "NO"In that case HOD informed me that another note will be tagged with the certificate. against me&  I said;proceed. She also harassed the DMO,who happened to be a friend of mine. She used to brain wash the husband of the deceased saying that the death was due to dehydration ; the doctor who treated the wife as well as the doctors who conducted the postmortem are responsible ; criminal action should be taken against them for causing death of the woman & giving a false opinion as to cause of death.. The HOD also motivated the DYSP,Calicut to take action against me. I was harassed by the DYSP & later on when I gave the statement,he was convinced that fault is with the HOD . out of only professional jealousy all these thing happened.
The case was heard in the Munsiff court kozhikode. I gave support for the doctors involved. The advocate who appeared for the doctors on behalf of IMA was very brilliant & knowledgeable. The HOD was cornered by the advocate regarding treatment aspects &; she was not able to withstand questions.I other words she is inexperienced with regard to treatment aspects.  The complainant informed the court that he was withdrawing the case but no harm should be done to his aid.. There ends the baseless accusation by the HOD.