The single-headed bench of Justice Sudesh Bansal emphasized that there is not even a shred of evidence against them.
"As per the investigation report, petitioner No.1 has been found to be in telephonic contact with brokers namely Akash, Prashant Yadav and Gopal, as much as money transaction from his bank account with the Giriraj Sharma, has also come on record. Such money transaction is apprehended to be part of payment apart from salary, for performing operation of kidney transplantation illegally. It has revealed in the investigation that petitioner No.1 performed operation of kidney transplantation as a team no 2''
According to the complaint, the administrations and doctors at Fortis Hospital were implicated in the racket. Allegedly, they were involved in fraud and collusion with kidney donors and recipients for financial gain, bypassing the necessary approval of Authorization Committees. Additionally, they were accused of fabricating NOCs by obtaining signatures on blank papers.
The petitioners were charged with offenses under Sections 420, 419, 471, and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), as well as Sections 18 and 19 of the Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Act, 1994.
The counsel for the petitioners contended that there was no connection between the petitioners and the forgery or with any of the brokers or patients involved. It was argued that the kidney transplantations performed by the petitioners were conducted with proper authorizations, and they did not receive any additional benefits apart from their regular monthly salaries.
On the contrary, the state government argued that the investigation into the FIRs was ongoing and that there was substantial evidence against one of the petitioners, leading to their arrest. Regarding the other petitioner, it was stated that they were not only in contact with a broker but also had financial transactions in their bank account beyond their regular salary, suggesting possible involvement in illegal kidney transplant operations.
After hearing arguments from both parties, the court concluded that there was sufficient evidence to connect the petitioners with the alleged racket of illegal kidney transplantation. The fact that one petitioner had already been arrested and there was incriminating evidence against the other petitioner indicated that there was no prima facie case in favor of quashing the FIR against them.
Hence, the Court refused to exercise its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC for quashing of FIR ad dismissed the plea.
Title: Dr. Jyoti Bansal and Anr. v State of Rajasthan and Anr.
