Kerala High Court denies relief to doctor booked for taking, sharing photos of woman during c-section

The Kerala High Court recently refused to quash the criminal proceedings against a doctor and hospital staff member who were booked after they took pictures and videos of a woman undergoing cesarian surgery and shared the videos and photos via WhatsApp [Sunil PP & Anr. v. State of Kerala & Anr.].Justice A Badharudeen went though the prosecution records, witness statements and the records collected during the investigation and concluded that prima face there was strong evidence against the accused."It could be gathered, prima facie, that the 1st accused videographed the cesarean procedure in between 11.13 hours and 11.16 hours on 18.07.2014 and the 2nd accused also took 19 photographs of the cesarean procedure and sent the same to CW17 through WhatsApp. That apart, the WhatsApp videographs and photographs of the cesarean procedure sent by the accused were collected during investigation to justify the involvement of the petitioners in this crime, prima facie. Thus the matter shall go for trial, and, therefore, the quashment sought for cannot be considered. In such a case, involving very serious offences, quashment of the proceedings could not be resorted to," the Court said in its order. .The order was passed on a petition moved by the doctor and hospital staff seeking orders to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against them for allegedly committing offences punishable under Sections 354(C) (voyeurism) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and other provisions of the Information Technology Act.Both petitioners worked at the Government Taluk Hospital in Payyannur where the woman gave birth to triplets via c-section. One of the petitioners allegedly recorded a video of the surgery and the other clicked 19 photographs which were then shared through WhatsApp As part of the investigation, those items were recovered by the police from the mobile phones and tablets of the petitioners..Before the High Court, the petitioners argued that the prosecution records did not indicate the commission of the offences alleged against them and that the victim cannot be identified from the material allegedly collected from their devices. However, the prosecution argued that there was enough and more material to prima facie establish the commission of the offences and that the case warrants trial..After going through the material on record, the Court concurred with the prosecution and dismissed the petition. .The petitioners were represented by advocates IV Pramod, KV Sasidharan, and Saira Souraj P.The complainant was represented by advocates Baiju Noel, RS Likhitha, and Shinto Sabastian.Public Prosecutor M Prasanth appeared for the State..[Read Order]