Prudeta
Prudeta
2026 INSC 319
📌 Paras 3-5
A complaint was filed alleging that a surgeon performed an Orchidectomy (removal of a testicle) on a child when consent was only given for Orchidopexy (retaining the testicle). The complainant further alleged that the consent form was later interpolated to include Orchidectomy, constituting forgery. A First Information Report was registered, and after investigation, a charge-sheet was filed. The appellant (surgeon) filed a petition to quash the proceedings, which was rejected by the High Court, which also directed the proceedings to be expedited.
📌 Para 4
Whether the criminal proceedings initiated against the appellant, a surgeon, for allegedly performing an Orchidectomy without proper consent and interpolating the consen
The bench further analyzed the constitutional validity of the impugned provisions and discussed the interpretation of Articles 14 and 21 in light of recent precedents...
Citing the ratio in prior decisions, the court held that the legislative intent was to ensure...
No credit card required · 14-day free trial