Madurai (Tamil Nadu) [India], August 20 : The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court on Wednesday directed the State Health Secretary and the Director of Medical Education to issue a comprehensive circular or set of guidelines to all government healthcare institutions outlining the duties and responsibilities of medical professionals appearing as expert witnesses before the court.
The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court issued the direction while dismissing petitions filed by Nambu Kaleeswaran and Selvaraj, seeking suspension of the 12-year prison sentence imposed by a trial court in 2023 in a POCSO case in Ramanathapuram involving the alleged sexual assault of an eight-year-old boy.
Justice P Pugalendhi pointed out inconsistencies in the evidence given by the doctor who examined the victim. Although the doctor initially stated that the victim had sustained injuries, the doctor denied those statements during cross-examination. The court also noted that the injury certificate did not contain all the necessary details.
The judge stressed that all medical and legal records must accurately document the findings observed during the examination and the professional opinion formed by the medical expert. He emphasised the importance of maintaining records in a clear and unambiguous manner and ensuring that medical professionals thoroughly read and familiarise themselves with the relevant records before entering the witness box.
The judge further observed that an expert witness must understand every question put to them during examination. Before signing their deposition, the witness must carefully read and verify it. If any omission or inadvertent error is noticed, it must immediately be brought to the attention of the court.
The court finds it appropriate to reiterate the importance of the key medical evidence, particularly in Pocso cases. "It is the key evidence that could determine the guilt or innocence of the accused person and assumes even greater significance, since child victims may struggle to report facts accurately or withstand hostile cross-examination," the court added.