Bulbul case: Nine years later, hospital staff acquitted
Neha Sharma | TNN | Updated: Feb 1, 2019, 06:00 IST
CHANDIGARH: In a nine-year-old case in which a poor woman was forced to move about at gynaecology ward of Government Multi-specialty Hospital (GMH), Sector 16, during labour pains and had to deliver the baby near the OPD counter, a Chandigarh district court acquitted four, including a doctor, on Thursday. In the case, which became popular as Bulbul case, the newborn had died.
The court of civil judge Jaspreet Singh acquitted Dr Deepak Thakur, paediatrics surgeon; Maya Devi, security guard; Parkash Rani, ward servant; and Dharma Devi, OPD attendant. The fifth accused, Dr Veena Sarna, head of the gynaecology department, was earlier discharged. The victim couple never appeared in the court despite various notices and the prosecution also failed to prove the case, which led to the acquittal.
The case dates back to July 21, 2010, when Bulbul, a poor woman from Bihar, was forced to deliver her child standing in the queue, waiting for medical attention at the OPD counter of hospital’s gynaecology ward. The baby later died as its head hit the floor. Doctors had claimed that the child was a stillborn. The couple had initially gone to PGI, where they were told to pay Rs 5,000, and then they came to GMH, where Bulbul’s husband Chotte Lal moved from one counter to the other to get an admit card. This led to delay and Bulbul delivered the baby in the middle of the reception.
An inquiry by the Chandigarh administration was ordered. Inquiry officers — Capt PS Shergill, the then additional deputy commissioner, and Dr Raj Bahadur, the then director-principal of GMCH-32 — had submitted the report and legal opinion was tendered by UT legal remembrancer. It was then decided to register a case against Maya Devi, Parkash Rani, and Dharma Devi for criminal negligence in performance of their medical duties. It was said that instead of providing help to Bulbul, the three made her move from one counter to the other, a dangerous situation for both the mother and the child. They deliberately blocked Bulbul's way to examination in the labour room. Also, it was ordered to register a case against Dr Veena Sarna and Dharma Devi for destroying material evidence of registration card. It was found that lab technician Kanchan had handed over the card to Dharma Devi. The original treatment card of Bulbul could not be traced thereafter, and it was presumed that both Dharma Devi and Dr Veena Sarna destroyed the card to save their skin. It was ordered to register a case against Dr Deepak Thakur for tampering with medical evidence, that is, record of Bulbul. It was stated in the chargesheet that Dr Deepak Thakur took two minutes to make up the story of intra-uterine death (IUD), which was falsified from the post-mortem and histopathology reports, wherein it was confirmed that the child was born alive and had died due to head injury.
It was alleged that Dr Deepak Thakur tampered with the original admission file of Bulbul by altering the time of declaring the baby dead, besides destroying Bulbul’s card.
Bulbul case: Couple never appeared in court
In a nine-year-old case in which a poor woman was forced to move about at gynaecology ward of Government Multi-specialty Hospital (GMH), Sector 16, during labour pains and had to deliver the baby near the OPD counter, a Chandigarh district court acquitted four, including a doctor, on Thursday. In the case, which became popular as Bulbul case, the newborn had died.
Chotte Lal and Bulbul never appeared in the court despite various summons over a period of five years. Hence, their statements were never recorded in the court.
The defence advocates, Aanchal Thakur, Harish Bharadwaj and Rabindra Pandit, argued that the accused were made scapegoats and the names of the real culprits never came up in the inquiry report.
Dr Deepak Thakur was posted in other department on the first floor and was not in the gynae department. It was also argued that as no admission was taken in the department, liability of its staff could not be fixed. After hearing the arguments, the court acquitted all the four accused.

The court of civil judge Jaspreet Singh acquitted Dr Deepak Thakur, paediatrics surgeon; Maya Devi, security guard; Parkash Rani, ward servant; and Dharma Devi, OPD attendant. The fifth accused, Dr Veena Sarna, head of the gynaecology department, was earlier discharged. The victim couple never appeared in the court despite various notices and the prosecution also failed to prove the case, which led to the acquittal.
The case dates back to July 21, 2010, when Bulbul, a poor woman from Bihar, was forced to deliver her child standing in the queue, waiting for medical attention at the OPD counter of hospital’s gynaecology ward. The baby later died as its head hit the floor. Doctors had claimed that the child was a stillborn. The couple had initially gone to PGI, where they were told to pay Rs 5,000, and then they came to GMH, where Bulbul’s husband Chotte Lal moved from one counter to the other to get an admit card. This led to delay and Bulbul delivered the baby in the middle of the reception.
An inquiry by the Chandigarh administration was ordered. Inquiry officers — Capt PS Shergill, the then additional deputy commissioner, and Dr Raj Bahadur, the then director-principal of GMCH-32 — had submitted the report and legal opinion was tendered by UT legal remembrancer. It was then decided to register a case against Maya Devi, Parkash Rani, and Dharma Devi for criminal negligence in performance of their medical duties. It was said that instead of providing help to Bulbul, the three made her move from one counter to the other, a dangerous situation for both the mother and the child. They deliberately blocked Bulbul's way to examination in the labour room. Also, it was ordered to register a case against Dr Veena Sarna and Dharma Devi for destroying material evidence of registration card. It was found that lab technician Kanchan had handed over the card to Dharma Devi. The original treatment card of Bulbul could not be traced thereafter, and it was presumed that both Dharma Devi and Dr Veena Sarna destroyed the card to save their skin. It was ordered to register a case against Dr Deepak Thakur for tampering with medical evidence, that is, record of Bulbul. It was stated in the chargesheet that Dr Deepak Thakur took two minutes to make up the story of intra-uterine death (IUD), which was falsified from the post-mortem and histopathology reports, wherein it was confirmed that the child was born alive and had died due to head injury.
It was alleged that Dr Deepak Thakur tampered with the original admission file of Bulbul by altering the time of declaring the baby dead, besides destroying Bulbul’s card.
Bulbul case: Couple never appeared in court
In a nine-year-old case in which a poor woman was forced to move about at gynaecology ward of Government Multi-specialty Hospital (GMH), Sector 16, during labour pains and had to deliver the baby near the OPD counter, a Chandigarh district court acquitted four, including a doctor, on Thursday. In the case, which became popular as Bulbul case, the newborn had died.
Chotte Lal and Bulbul never appeared in the court despite various summons over a period of five years. Hence, their statements were never recorded in the court.
The defence advocates, Aanchal Thakur, Harish Bharadwaj and Rabindra Pandit, argued that the accused were made scapegoats and the names of the real culprits never came up in the inquiry report.
Dr Deepak Thakur was posted in other department on the first floor and was not in the gynae department. It was also argued that as no admission was taken in the department, liability of its staff could not be fixed. After hearing the arguments, the court acquitted all the four accused.
All Comments ()+^ Back to Top
Refrain from posting comments that are obscene, defamatory or inflammatory, and do not indulge in personal attacks, name calling or inciting hatred against any community. Help us delete comments that do not follow these guidelines by marking them offensive. Let's work together to keep the conversation civil.
HIDE