Make your own free website on Tripod.com

sunbothj.jpg

Delhi High Court heard the legal provisions for investigating deaths of Indian citizens abroad

Summary | PM Order | Photos | Legislation | Expert Reports | Links | High Court | HC 12/10/07 | Supreme Court | UK Police report

Six and a half years in a mortuary freezer in London, UK and seven months in a mortuary freezer in Delhi, India, yet the allegations that British doctors deliberately killed baby Sunaina Chaudhari with 170 times overdose of ranitidine and lethal potassium chloride injections immediately before her death, and removed her internal organs including eyeballs, tongue and brain, four days before the post-mortem, are yet to be properly investigated on the body of the 5 month old Indian baby girl.

AFFIDAVIT

 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

W. P. (C) NO. 6179 OF 2007

CM 121128

 

(PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION)

 

 

 

IN THE MATTER OF:

 

Public Interest Litigation

 

AND

 

IN THE MATTER OF:

 

Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India

 

AND

 

IN THE MATTER OF:

 

Seeking indulgence of this Hon’ble Court to undo injustice having been done to an Indian citizen abroad in regard to criminal investigation in the matter of death of his five month old daughter baby Sunaina Chaudhari under suspicious circumstances

 

AND

 

IN THE MATTER OF:

 

Violation of fundamental rights as guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

 

AND

 

 

IN THE MATTER OF:

 

1.       Social Jurist, A Civil Rights Group

        Through Mr. Suraj Kumar, Coordinator

        478-479, Lawyers Chamber, Western Wing

        Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi-110054.

 

 

2.           Ms. Sadhna Chaudhari W/o Sh. Rajesh Kumar

UK Address: 27 Robinia Close,

Ilford, Essex, IG6 3AJ

presently residing at 36-D, Hazara Park

Gali No.5, Chandra Nagar (West)

Delhi-110051                                                                 Petitioners

Versus

 

1.           Union of India

Through Secretary

Ministry of Home, North Block

New Delhi-110001

 

2.           The Secretary

Ministry of Health & Family Welfare

Government of India

Nirman Bhavan, New Delhi-110001

 

3.           Director General, Government of India,

Directorate General of Health Services,

Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi 110001

 

4.           Govt. of NCT of Delhi

Through Principal Secretary (Home)

Secretariat, IP Estate

New Delhi-110001        

 

5.           The Principal Secretary (Health)

Govt. of NCT of Delhi

Secretariat, IP Estate

New Delhi-110001

 

6.           The Commissioner of Police, Delhi

Police Headquarters, IP Estate,

New Delhi 110002

 

7.           Dean, Maulana Azad Medical College

Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg

New Delhi 110002                                                …..Respondents

AFFIDAVIT BY PETITIONER NO. 2

AS REQUESTED BY THE COURT ON 17/09/2007

 

 

26/10/2000: On arrival to King George Hospital, Ilford, Essex from Redbridge court, the family made allegations to Police that doctors there had killed baby Sunaina.  The family carressed the fully clothed body of 5 month old baby Sunaina, from 12pm onwards.  Police arrived at 1pm.  The family held a Hindu ceremony with the aarti prayer in the hospital chapel at 6pm.  The family witnessed that the body was taken to the hospital mortuary.

 

27/11/2000: The Times “Parents Say Hospital Chose to Let Baby Die”.  ANNEXURE 1.

 

30/12/2000: Great Ormond Street Hospital confirmed in a letter that they had received the body of baby Sunaina on 30.10.2000 directly from King George Hospital for the first post-mortem.  Evidence suggests that all internal organs of baby Sunaina were already removed from the body and the body was not intact prior to the post-mortem.  “Date taken 26.10.00” on the post-mortem report refers to the date the organs were removed from the body.  The post-mortem report refers to “frozen tissue”.  Yet the Coroner falsely claims that the body was transferred from the hospital mortuary to the Home Office secure mortuary at East Ham, Essex on 26.10.2000.  Had the body been intact, first pathologist Professor Risdon would have investigated the suspicious needle puncture mark in the baby’s neck, evident in the Police photographs, yet not reported in his post-mortem report.  Professor Risdon described “the eyes appeared depressed”, confirming that they were not in their sockets.  In the Police photographs taken prior to organ removal, the eyes are not depressed.

 

30/01/2001:  The massive scale Organs Scandal leaked out in all the national press of the United Kingdom.  ANNEXURE 2.

 

31/01/2001: A so called second post-mortem was staged at the Central Middlesex Hospital, North West Middlesex Hospitals NHS Trust, London, between 5pm to 5.30pm yet there was no evidence that the body had been opened.  No photographs or video was done.  No chromosome test, no cytogenetics report.  The family waited 1hour for the body to be prepared for a viewing.  When the parents viewed the body of baby Sunaina at 6.30pm in the mortuary, the mother lifted the eyelids the father took a photograph  showing cotton wool balls in the eye sockets.  The second pathologist did not report in his post mortem report that the eyes were not in their sockets.  The second pathologist had sight of the Police photographs showing the needle puncture mark in the neck yet failed to investigate it as a cause of death.

 

12/02/2001: We requested another viewing of the body.  We took photographs and a video recording of the cotton wool balls in the eye sockets and the removal of the cotton wool balls.

 

May 2001:  DrAdoko, the family’s lawyer, a Human Rights campaigner compiled a legal report “Who Killed Baby Sunaina” and submitted copies to the Coroner, the Police and the Attorney General.  ANNEXURE 3

 

09/09/2001 to 11/09/2001: An Inquest was held into the death, yet the missing tests had still not been done.  No mention was made of the needle puncture mark in the neck, or the 170 times ranitidine drug overdose or the four doses of potassium chloride before death. The Coroner refused to allow Neelu Chaudhari to come as witness and she refused to allow the family’s legal representative, DrAdoko, to represent them.  The family made an application in the High Court, London, for a change of Coroner on 7/09/2001, but failed.

 

Subsequently, the family requested viewings on every birthday of baby Sunaina, namely, 25th May, and on her mother’s birthday on 26th October, but these were refused.

 

The family also wrote several letters to the Coroner, the Mortuary Manager, Tony Falcon, the legal department manager Jane Chapman and the Medical Director Dr Andrew Reid of the North West Middlesex Hospitals NHS Trust requesting the missing investigations and tests such as MRI scan of the body, chromosome tests, cytogenetics report, Toxicology etc…but these were not done. 

 

03/01/2002: Dissatisfied with the failings of the two post-mortems and Inquest, the family submitted an application to the Police for a reopening of the Police investigation (which had earlier been part of the Inquest only). See ANNEXURE 4.

 

26/02/2002: Court of Appeal application C2001/2060, Lord Justice Sedley stated that the Applicants had the legal right to bring Criminal or Civil cases.  Administrative Court, Mr Justice Burton in application CO 324/2002 also confirmed this.

 

03/10/2002: The Sikh Times published a series of articles about the delays in the Police investigation.  See ANNEXURE 5.

 

04/11/2002:  Further, the family filed a private prosecution in the City Magistrates Court.  The Court failed to file the application.  See ANNEXURE 6.

 

21/11/2002: The Sikh Times published an article about the pending Private Prosecution, which was never carried out by the City Magistrates Court.    See ANNEXURE 7.

 

11 Dec 2002: The mother wrote to the Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain asking for an investigation into the drug overdoses.  She wrote again on 11 March 2007 to complain about their failings and delays.  See true copy of the same at ANNEXURE 8.

 

A few years later the family was informed that the mortuary where the body was being stored was demolished and that the body had been moved to a new location, but the family was not informed of the new location.  When the family members visited to view the body, the mortuary was indeed not there anymore.   

 

March 2004: Neelu Chaudhari, aunt of Baby, a qualified pharmacist, compiled an Expert Report with evidence of the ranitidine and potassium chloride drug overdoses given to the baby as well as the deprivation of oxygen for the resulting 37.4% blood oxygen levels prior to her death.    See ANNEXURE 9.

 

20/12/2006: London Borough of Redbridge threatened the family that they would destroy the body of Baby Sunaina.  The family pleaded that they themselves wanted the body and the missing organs returned to them so they could carry out the missing investigations and then the funeral.     See ANNEXURE 10.

 

Feb 2007: The family was shocked by the legal action taken by London Borough of Redbridge, the same Local authority that took out a protection order to prevent the family from entering the hospital whilst the baby was being given lethal drug overdoses of potassium chloride on 26/10/2000.    See ANNEXURE 11.

 

March 2007:  The family instructed the Birmingham branch of the funeral Directors Dignity, managed by Inderjit Singh, to assist them in the location and repatriation of the body to India after the London branch of Dignity failed to assist.  This was effected on 17/3/2007

 

Heard in Court 2 Before Judge Thakur and Judge Birbal on 27/09/2007 between 11.50am to 1.00pm

Six and a half years in a mortuary freezer in London, UK and seven months in a mortuary freezer in Delhi, India, yet the allegations that British doctors deliberately killed baby Sunaina Chaudhari are yet to be properly investigated on the body of the 5 month old Indian baby girl.

High Court, New Delhi