E-Paper
SC asks AIIMS medical board to assist inquiry panel probing Jayalalithaa’s death
The Court requested the Director, AIIMS, New Delhi, to nominate a panel of doctors who are “specialists in the fields of treatment of the ailments as suffered by the late chief minister of Tamil Nadu.”
The Supreme Court has revived the enquiry into the death of former Tamil Nadu chief minister J Jayalalithaa, more than 31 months after it was stayed by the Supreme Court in April 2019 on a plea filed by Chennai-based Apollo hospital, where Jayalalithaa had breathed her last.
The top court, while disposing of the hospital’s plea, directed a medical board of doctors nominated by the Director of the Delhi-based All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) to assist the judicial enquiry panel probing the events leading to the former chief minister’s death on December 5, 2016.
A bench of justices S Abdul Nazeer and Krishna Murari, while quashing the hospital’s plea, said, “We are of the view that it is just and proper to constitute a medical board to assist the commission in the disposal of the case.” The order was passed on November 30.
The hospital had objected to the manner of proceeding conducted by the Justice (Retd) A Arumughaswamy Commission and requested for a medical board to ascertain the efficacy of treatment provided to the former chief minister, who was admitted at Apollo hospital for 75 days before her death. The commission was constituted by the Tamil Nadu government under the commission of inquiry (CoI) Act in September 2017. The proceedings of the commissioner were stayed by the Supreme Court in April 2019 after Apollo hospital approached the top court.
The Court requested the Director, AIIMS, New Delhi, to nominate a panel of doctors who are “specialists in the fields of treatment of the ailments as suffered by the late chief minister of Tamil Nadu.” The bench asked the Commission to furnish complete records of the proceedings to the medical board and said, “The medical board, so appointed, is permitted to participate in all further proceedings of the Commission and furnish a copy of the report to the Commission.” The report of the board of doctors shall also be furnished to the hospital and VK Sasikala, a close aide to late Jayalalitha.
In addition, the top court also directed the Commission to furnish the documents, depositions of witnesses and records available with the Commission to the hospital and Sasikala, as and when an appropriate application is moved in this regard. The Court permitted the hospital to cross-examine or recall any witness or individual whose evidence had already been recorded and closed by the commission. Both the hospital and Sasikala were permitted to lead their evidence in support of their case at the appropriate stage.
The commission headed by former Madras high court judge, Justice Arumughaswamy was constituted to probe the “circumstances and situation” leading to the hospitalization and subsequent treatment provided to Jayalalithaa till her unfortunate demise.
The hospital was represented in the top court by senior advocate CA Sundaram who wanted the records of the proceedings, including evidence led before the Commission to be summoned as he claimed the commission was biased and formed preconceived views about the hospital. He said that a judicial mind cannot examine the correctness of adequacy or inadequacy of medical treatment given to the former CM, without the assistance of an independent medical board.
The 154 witnesses examined by the commission till April 2019 included 56 doctors attached to Apollo hospital, five doctors from AIIMS, 12 Government doctors including the medical board of five doctors constituted by the Tamil Nadu government, 22 paramedical and other staff of Apollo hospital, and 59 other witnesses.
The present-day DMK government supported the continuation of the commission. The state government in August moved an application before the top court to vacate the stay citing the enormous financial burden on the state exchequer to pay salary to the Commission staff to the tune of ₹4.26 lakh.
The hospital had earlier approached the Madras high court with the same allegations against the Commission but failed to get any relief.
