Buldhana Food Poisoning: Bombay HC Demands Affidavit From Govt

Share this news

The Bombay High Court took note of a recent event in Maharashtra’s Buldhana district in which over 200 individuals, including children and women, were ill as a result of food poisoning and were treated on the streets outside the hospital due to a lack of beds.

The court ordered an affidavit from the government concerning the issue of delivering saline solution from bottles strung on ropes to patients who became ill after eating prasad at a religious function earlier this week.

Amicus curiae advocate Mohit Khanna raised the issue before a division bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Arif S Doctor, who was hearing a suo motu PIL filed last year regarding the deaths of patients at government hospitals in Maharashtra’s Nanded and Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar districts.

Following Khanna’s reference to a news video highlighting the severity of the situation and the infrastructure problem, Government Pleader P P Kakade submitted a preliminary report stating that it was an emergency and that approximately 150 patients suffering from food poisoning were transported to the nearby 30-bed Bibi hospital.

Due to a lack of beds, treatment was provided in makeshift arrangements, he stated. He claimed that further patients were sent to nearby Mehtar and Lonar hospitals.

Kakade stated that the hospitals had all of the necessary medications but were unable to treat the patients owing to a scarcity of beds. However, it was not a dangerous illness, but rather a stomach condition, and all patients were dismissed the next morning, he told the court.

The court questioned, how far is the district hospital from where the incident occurred. Can’t you take them there? You said it wasn’t serious. What if they were suffering from terrible illnesses?

Kakade responded by saying that the district hospital is 100 kilometres away. They could’ve taken them to a bigger hospital.

“Let an affidavit on behalf of appropriate authority be filed within 10 days,” the bench stated, adding that it would then hear the matter.