“In our view, a second post-mortem is not necessary as the main injuries have already been covered extensively in the video”
Experts who watched a video recording of the autopsy done on E. Ilavarasan’s body along with two judges of the Madras High Court reported several defects in the process on Tuesday. On a direction from the court, the doctors filed reports giving their opinions in the evening. While all others felt that a second post-mortem examination was not necessary, V. Dekal, a doctor chosen by the petitioner who favours a fresh autopsy, suggested that it be done afresh.
M.J.E.Ambroise and K.K.Shaha of JIPMER, Puducherry, said in their report: “During the performance of autopsy, there was a continuous stream of visitors, including lawyers, politicians and police personnel inside the mortuary; apart from the personnel authorised for recording the post-mortem, it was observed that other police constables were also recording the procedure on their cell phones.”
Underlining other defects, they said collection of blood for chemical analysis was unsatisfactory and none of the organs had been weighed as per standard protocol. They also said the lighting was not sufficient and the process was stopped in the middle for two hours and a half on the request of the SP, Dharmapuri. However, they categorically said: “In our view, a second post-mortem is not necessary, as the main injuries have already been covered extensively in the video.”
Dr.V.Dekal, Associate Professor, Saveetha Medical College, said, “It is not a much deficient autopsy for routine cases like accident or murder. But to answer a few crucial questions in a highly suspicious case like this, it is not a reasonably good autopsy. Autopsy surgeon may not be able to tell whether it could be suicide or homicide from the way the documentation has been done. So, a second autopsy will definitely help to correct these deficiencies.