Dr Sudhir Gupta’s sensational claim of pressure to give tailor-made autopsy report may or may not change the course of probe, but exposes how scientists and politicians are out to influence one another
Pankaj Kumar | July 4, 2014
A pliable forensic department appeared to be the top priority on the agenda of the governing body meeting of the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) on June 7, 2014. Dr OP Murthy, who was debarred for promotion on account of his acts of indiscretion, was made professor with retrospective effect from July 1, 2011 to pave the way for his elevation as head of the department.
In the meeting, all obstacles in the way of Dr Murthy were removed by invoking the inherent powers of the governing body (GB) under exceptional circumstances. However, the office memorandum does not elaborate on the circumstances which warranted invoking this emergency provision.
Apparently, AIIMS director Dr MC Mishra and forensic department head Dr Sudhir Gupta were at loggerheads then. Dr Murthy’s promotion was necessitated by the AIIMS director’s inability to run his writ in the forensic department due to an obdurate head of department like Dr Gupta.
Now look at Dr Murthy’s track record which is less than illustrious in all respects. He was repeatedly denied promotion by the standing selection committee which clears promotion after assessing merits and demerits of candidates. Dr Murthy’s conduct was found to be dubious on account of his absenteeism and his professional competence was under cloud. Despite these serious handicaps, Dr Murthy’s elevation was ensured in the GB meeting of AIIMS whose legal position has been challenged by Dr Gupta in the central administrative tribunal (CAT).
In fact, the manner in which Dr Murthy’s promotion was carried out is indicative of the clout wielded by the forensic department of the institute.
Sunanda Pushkar’s mysterious death and the resultant controversy is not an isolated case where faculty members of the forensic department got involved in a public spat and their disagreements caused a serious political or law and order crises.
Take the case of Ponty Chaddha, who was killed in a fratricidal fight. The autopsy on his body was conducted in such a cavalier manner that the police discovered on x-ray that three bullets were still lodged in Chaddha’s body. The police retrieved the body from the relatives and asked the forensic department to re-do the post-mortem and remove bullets for evidence.
That the AIIMS forensic department was susceptible to tailor autopsy reports to suit the interests of the police has come to light in various cases in the past as well. The most pertinent case related to the murder of Dr YS Sachan, deputy chief medical officer of Uttar Pradesh, whose body was found inside Lucknow jail. The team of forensic experts who visited the spot to assist the CBI declared the death as suicide. The court, however, rejected the AIIMS report and passed severe strictures on the functioning of the forensic department.
The same kind of professional incompetence and opacity were demonstrated in the Aarushi Talwar murder case and the Ishrat Jehan encounter case, where the judiciary criticised the forensic experts. The Ishrat Jehan case triggered a political controversy in which top leaders of the BJP got embroiled. The supreme court-mandated SIT rejected the opinion of AIIMS experts, who tried to reconstruct the crime scene as a genuine encounter.
Apparently, the ongoing tussle on promotion in the forensic department of AIIMS is a fight to hold the leverage of influence that can be often effectively used to please or run down political masters. Dr Gupta’s sensational disclosure – that he was goaded to give a tailor-made report on Sunanda Pushkar’s autopsy by higher authorities in AIIMS and political establishment – may or may not have a significant bearing on the criminal investigation. But it is bound to expose the hideous face of criminal investigation which is, more often than not, influenced to suit political ends.
The Railways was unable to meet its operational cost of passenger and other coaching services. During 2014-15, there was a loss of Rs 33,821.70 crore on passenger and other coaching services. The freight services earned a profit of Rs 38,312.59 crore which indicated that 88.28 percent
Seasoned BJP parliamentarian Nand Kumar Sai, who took charge as the chairperson of the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes (NCST) on February 28, has his work cut out for him. Archana Mishra caught up with Sai, 71, on his first day in office where he
Should there be automatic termination as member of parliament if that person takes oath as minister/chief minister in a state?
When the truth was a few steps away from Modi’s gaze In November 2014, prime minister Narendra Modi made his first visit to his constituency Varanasi and launched a massive cleanliness drive at Asi ghat, which was covered in mud and silt. When locals sa
India has slipped one spot in the Human Development Index 2016. India’s HDI value for 2015 is 0.624 — which put the country in the medium human development category - positioning it at 131 out of 188 countries and territories. Between 1990 and 2015,
An appeal was made to PSUs to contribute funds under their CSR Scheme towards Health Minister’s Cancer Patient Fund-CSR for treatment of poor cancer patients. India Infrastructure Finance Company Limited (IIFCL) contributed an amount of Rs 7.5 crore in 2015-16.