https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288450 For an offence under Section 304-A IPC, criminal liability requires more than civil negligence; the act must amount to criminal negligence and the death must be the direct, proximate result of that act. On the facts, the alleged failure of the petitioner and supervising doctor to verify anaesthesia formalities before surgery did not establish the high degree of negligence required for criminal prosecution. The causative act was attributed mainly to the anaesthetist, and the petitioner's conduct did not show the requisite direct causal nexus. The proceedings were therefore quashed against the petitioner for want of sufficient material to attract Section 304-A IPC. en-us Mon, 15 Mar 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 08 Jun 2020 12:14:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288450 For an offence under Section 304-A IPC, criminal liability requires more than civil negligence; the act must amount to criminal negligence and the death must be the direct, proximate result of that act. On the facts, the alleged failure of the petitioner and supervising doctor to verify anaesthesia formalities before surgery did not establish the high degree of negligence required for criminal prosecution. The causative act was attributed mainly to the anaesthetist, and the petitioner's conduct did not show the requisite direct causal nexus. The proceedings were therefore quashed against the petitioner for want of sufficient material to attract Section 304-A IPC. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 15 Mar 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288450