Justice Loya did not die of heart attack, says expert

Prateek Goyal
Tuesday, 6 March 2018

Senior Advocate and Secretary of CPIL, Kamini Jaisawal said, “We have filed the intervention application based on the latest opinion given by Dr Kaul.”

PUNE: The latest expert opinion by a leading cardiologist about the death of CBI Judge BH Loya, who was presiding over the Sohrabuddin Sheikh encounter case, denies the claims made by Maharashtra government that he died of a heart attack. 

This is the second opinion by medical experts in this case.

Citing the latest opinion by renowned cardiologist and Padmashree Dr Upendra Kaul that Justice Loya did not die of heart attack, the Supreme Court’s (SC) senior lawyer Prashant Bhushan, appearing on behalf of Centre for Public Interest Litigation (CPIL) on Monday, filed an intervention application in the SC on the basis of the new opinion.

CPIL took other cardiologists’ opinion which concurred with Kaul’s findings.

Senior Advocate and Secretary of CPIL, Kamini Jaisawal said, “We have filed the intervention application based on the latest opinion given by Dr Kaul.”

The CPIL mentions in the petition that State of Maharashtra has relied entirely on the version of four judges of the lower court, two of whom were purportedly with Judge Loya on the fatal night in Nagpur, produced without any affidavit. 

The petition states, “However, even if one were to assume that this is the version of those judges and that they are telling the truth, their account certainly does not prove that the death was due to a heart attack. The eye witness account could be consistent with various other causes of death including poisoning.” 

DEATH  CONTROVERSY
- Previously also the opinion mentioned by leading forensic expert Dr RK Sharma cited in a news report published by a magazine in February, negates the cause of death as heart attack.  
- CPIL felt Sharma’s findings were critical to the case. 

QUESTIONS ON KAUL’S RESPONSE
CPIL Q1: Could Loya have suffered a serious heart attack, one-two hours before the ECG was taken? 
Kaul: Most unlikely, the ECG has no evidence of a recent myocardial infraction.
CPIL Q2: Is the histopathology report of his coronary arteries and heart muscle consistent with his death being due to acute myocardial infraction or coronary thrombosis ? 
Kaul: The histopathology of heart muscle says it is normal. The coronary artery block in LAD could be an innocent bystander. 
CPIL Q3: Whether a person who has died due to myocardial infraction, shows significant congestion of dura, liver, spleen, kidney, larynx, trachoa and  bronchi, lungs. Is it possible for this congestion of all his organs as mentioned in the post mortem report, to have taken place because of CPR administered at the time of his death?
Kaul: Unlikely to be because of recent myocardial infraction but could be because of an intensive CPR.

Related News