IP International Journal of Forensic Medicine and Toxicological Sciences

Print ISSN: 2581-9844

Online ISSN: 2456-9615

CODEN : IIJFA2

IP International Journal of Forensic Medicine and Toxicological Sciences (IJFMTS) open access, peer-reviewed quarterly journal publishing since 2016 and is published under the Khyati Education and Research Foundation (KERF), is registered as a non-profit society (under the society registration act, 1860), Government of India with the vision of various accredited vocational courses in healthcare, education, paramedical, yoga, publication, teaching and research activity, with the aim of faster and better dissemination of knowledge, we will be more...

  • Article highlights
  • Article tables
  • Article images

Article statistics

Viewed: 251

PDF Downloaded: 132


Get Permission Raju, Harish, Singh, Vaishnav, and Kalsi: Delay in final opinion of autopsy requiring Histo-pathological and chemical analysis


Introduction

Death is inevitable. The manner of death will either be natural or unnatural. 1 Inquiry or investigation into the cause of death is called inquest. In India, two type of inquest are followed, police inquest u/s (174 CrPC) or magistrate inquest u/s (176CrPC), 2, 3 The manner, mode and cause of death are determined at autopsy. 4 Postmortem examination report (PMR) is an important medicolegal document which is required by courts for administration of justice and legal issues, by insurance agencies to settle claims, and by family members of the deceased to know the cause of death, etc. 5, 6, 7 As per services under Right to Service Act, copies of medicolegal report should be given within two days and copies of PMR within three days. 8 Once the investigation is complete, copies of complete medicolegal report should be provided within seven days. 9 PMR is issued mostly on the day of postmortem examination, however, in cases where viscera are sent for histopathological examination (HPE) or toxicological/chemical examination (CE) or both, final opinion is given after receipt of the reports. 10, 11

Due to infrastructural and man-power problems, combined with the ever-increasing work load, the investigative agencies and the labs take their own time in processing the cases. Only when both the reports are received by our departments, the final opinion regarding cause of death can be given. Delay in either of these reports results in finalized the cause of death.

Materials and Methods

The present study was aimed at determining the delay in arriving at the final opinion from the day of postmortem examination. Further, analysis was also done to find out the delay by various stake holders i.e., the investigating agency, the labs, and also delay on part of our department, too. The data, viz, case details, commencement of autopsy and dispersal of viscera, histopathological and toxicological examination reports (date of receipt of viscera, date of reporting and date of dispatch of reports) and from the final opinion (date of request for final opinion, date of final opinion), etc., was collected retrospectively, from the records of the post-mortem examinations conducted in the year 2015 and 2018. Usually, it takes around two years to give the final opinion regarding cause of death. This study was conducted on the postmortem examination conducted in the pre COVID period to rule out the delay related to COVID restrictions. The time taken at different levels was studied and the average delay at each level was calculated using SPSS version 24.

Observations and Results

A total 900 and 1172 autopsies were conducted in the year 2015 and 2018, respectively. Of these, viscera were sent for further examination in 220 and 435 cases, respectively. Average delay from the day of death to postmortem examination in unknown cases was 10 and 6.2 days for the year 2015 and 2018 respectively, but it was less than 2 days in known cases for both the years. On data analysis, it was found that the final cause of death was opined in only about 37 percent cases. The rest of the cases are still pending. (Table 1, Table 2, Table 3, Table 4, Table 5)

Figure 1

Number of cases

https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/typeset-prod-media-server/25d0bf55-36a6-4e33-a1be-5b4f7077c700image1.png

Table 1

Showing delay atvarious level in daily diary report (DDR) cases

Delay in depositing viscera for HPE

Delay in depositing viscera for CE

Delay in Reporting HPE

Delay in Forwarding HPE report

Delay in reporting CE

Delay in Giving final opinion

Total time taken from day of PME to give final opinion

Year

2015

2018

2015

2018

2015

2018

2015

2018

2015

2018

2015

2018

2015

2018

Total Cases

171

369

41

79

171

361

161

255

38

77

63

85

65

156

Pending cases

26

39

156

329

26

47

36

153

159

331

134

323

132

252

Mean

25.97

30.13

51.44

45.49

109.00

79.08

17.86

15.29

280.92

176.04

11.43

10.28

612.45

376.45

Median

9.00

8.00

14.00

19.00

94.50

72.00

4.00

5.00

240.50

92.00

5.00

3.00

358.00

214.00

Std. Deviation

51.801

86.895

110.171

73.099

65.09

45.057

50.603

30.197

203.575

187.825

25.365

20.031

602.806

329.642

Minimum

0

0

2

1

15

3

0

0

31

20

0

0

59

44

Maximum

372

1036

580

387

344

391

402

200

799

781

173

111

2558

1432

Percentiles

25

4.00

2.50

7.50

8.00

59.50

51.50

1.00

1.00

67.50

58.00

1.00

1.00

168.00

131.75

50

9.00

8.00

14.00

19.00

94.50

72.00

4.00

5.00

240.50

92.00

5.00

3.00

358.00

214.00

75

22.00

25.00

45.50

46.00

138.25

97.00

11.50

12.00

466.00

189.00

9.00

9.00

772.50

567.50

Table 2

Showing delay at various level in first information report (FIR) cases

Delay in depositing viscera for HPE

Delay in depositing viscera for CE

Delay in Reporting HPE

Delay in Forwarding HPE report

Delay in reporting CE

Delay in Giving final opinion

Total time taken from day of PME to give final opinion

Year

2015

2018

2015

2018

2015

2018

2015

2018

2015

2018

2015

2018

2015

2018

Total Cases

18

25

7

10

18

25

14

17

6

9

9

13

10

17

Pending cases

5

2

16

17

5

2

9

10

17

18

14

14

13

10

Mean

155.94

40.40

20.71

59.80

120.50

84.32

4.64

25.53

123.00

311.11

9.44

11.85

228.70

393.06

Median

12.50

15.00

15.00

39.00

117.0

79.00

3.50

10.00

87.00

205.00

4.00

4.00

198.50

230.00

Std. Deviation

592.330

74.848

16.710

65.983

62.77

39.77

5.168

30.311

94.06

278.69

14.80

17.832

99.511

349.869

Minimum

1

0

1

6

19

13

0

0

61

98

0

1

113

74

Maximum

2528

364

43

213

233

179

17

85

306

918

44

52

378

1240

Percentiles

25

3.00

3.50

6.00

9.50

75.00

57.50

1.00

1.00

61.75

101.50

0.50

2.00

138.50

172.50

50

12.50

15.00

15.00

39.00

117.00

79.00

3.50

10.00

87.00

205.00

4.00

4.00

198.50

230.00

75

25.75

47.50

38.00

90.75

154.50

97.00

7.50

56.00

177.75

467.00

14.50

11.50

327.00

556.00

Table 3

Showing delay at various level in cases belonging to Chandigarh policejurisdiction

Delay in depositing viscera for HPE

Delay in depositing viscera for CE

Delay in Reporting HPE

Delay in Forwarding HPE report

Delay in reporting CE

Delay in Giving final opinion

Total time taken from day of PME to give final opinion

Year

2015

2018

2015

2018

2015

2018

2015

2018

2015

2018

2015

2018

2015

2018

Total Cases

74

123

29

56

74

122

69

86

28

55

34

55

35

88

Pending cases

13

8

58

75

13

9

18

45

59

76

53

76

52

43

Mean

23.50

19.98

42.90

30.77

110.34

78.19

9.29

19.98

223.14

111.75

8.41

7.73

722.03

398.97

Median

10.50

9.00

14.00

18.50

89.50

72.00

3.00

6.00

187.00

83.00

5.00

4.00

386.00

303.50

Std. Deviation

47.447

35.693

81.621

36.863

65.09

36.282

26.824

34.105

163.501

96.718

17.277

13.204

688.743

314.490

Minimum

0

0

4

1

21

12

0

0

33

20

0

0

87

56

Maximum

360

221

355

213

313

201

196

200

534

523

101

68

2558

1432

Percentiles

25

3.00

3.00

8.00

9.50

65.00

53.75

1.00

1.00

66.50

54.00

1.75

1.00

248.00

150.75

50

10.50

9.00

14.00

18.50

89.5

72.00

3.00

6.00

187.00

83.00

5.00

4.00

386.00

303.50

75

24.00

20.00

32.50

38.75

140.5

98.00

8.00

23.50

305.75

127.00

8.00

7.00

1239.00

555.50

Table 4

Showing delay at various level in Cases belonging to Haryana police jurisdiction

Delay in depositing viscera for HPE

Delay in depositing viscera for CE

Delay in Reporting HPE

Delay in Forwarding HPE report

Delay in reporting CE

Delay in Giving final opinion

Total time taken from day of PME to give final opinion

Year

2015

2018

2015

2018

2015

2018

2015

2018

2015

2018

2015

2018

2015

2018

Total Cases

45

112

11

17

45

108

40

70

9

17

20

16

22

44

Pending cases

9

18

43

113

9

22

14

60

45

113

34

114

32

86

Mean

34.38

62.20

83.64

118.24

119.98

87.03

24.93

12.86

307.89

393.82

11.35

16.31

426.27

422.36

Median

14.00

14.00

32.00

78.00

98.00

76.50

5.00

4.50

365.00

354.00

4.50

2.00

293.50

193.50

Std. Deviation

52.678

148.372

167.095

118.427

73.853

56.240

68.699

22.826

177.580

270.143

14.110

29.953

411.221

391.163

Minimum

0

0

3

6

15

11

0

0

54

29

0

0

115

45

Maximum

258

1036

580

387

344

391

402

91

479

918

44

87

1949

1138

Percentiles

25

5.00

3.00

11.00

27.50

69.00

54.25

2.00

1.00

132.50

130.50

1.00

1.00

138.50

119.75

50

14.00

14.00

32.00

78.00

98.00

76.50

5.00

4.50

365.00

354.00

4.50

2.00

293.50

193.50

75

41.50

65.25

66.00

166.00

152.50

100.50

16.00

11.00

473.50

592.00

22.50

10.50

636.75

805.50

Table 5

Showing delay at various level in cases belonging to Punjab police jurisdiction

Delay in Days

Delay in depositing viscera for HPE

Delay in depositing viscera for CE

Delay in Reporting HPE

Delay in Forwarding HPE report

Delay in reporting CE

Delay in Giving final opinion

Total time taken from day of PME to give final opinion

Year

2015

2018

2015

2018

2015

2018

2015

2018

2015

2018

2015

2018

2015

2018

Total Cases

67

135

7

8

67

135

63

105

6

6

17

16

17

26

Pending cases

7

12

67

139

7

12

11

42

68

141

57

131

57

121

Mean

19.12

16.84

12.43

10.75

107.58

75.07

20.13

15.75

393.83

417.83

16.76

8.00

434.59

282.77

Median

7.00

6.00

9.00

6.50

102.00

68.00

4.00

5.00

334.50

554.50

3.00

3.00

199.00

184.50

Std. Deviation

49.651

32.842

15.946

14.704

58.884

42.008

52.655

32.292

320.694

240.913

41.255

13.525

440.968

306.411

Minimum

0

1

1

1

19

3

0

0

62

60

0

0

113

44

Maximum

372

213

47

45

285

326

313

166

799

600

173

52

1598

1240

Percentiles

25

3.00

2.00

2.00

1.00

58.00

50.00

1.00

1.00

92.00

135.75

1.00

1.25

149.50

105.00

50

7.00

6.00

9.00

6.50

102.00

68.00

4.00

5.00

334.50

554.50

3.00

3.00

199.00

184.50

75

17.00

15.00

14.00

13.75

139.00

92.00

11.00

12.00

748.00

582.75

13.50

7.75

719.00

260.00

The Kruskal-Wallis test was applied on independent-samples on the data of delay in forwarding and depositing viscera for HPE, which retained the null hypothesis i.e., the delay in forwarding and depositing viscera for HPE across categories of Police Stations. 12 The Kruskal-Wallis test was applied on independent-samples on the data of delay in Delay in Depositing and reporting CE, which rejected the null hypothesis i.e., the delay in forwarding and depositing viscera for CE varies across categories of Police Stations. For the distribution of delay in giving final opinion and the distribution of total time taken from date of PME to final opinion Kruskal-Wallis test on independent-samples retained the null hypothesis i.e., delay in giving final opinion and total time taken from date of PME to final opinion is the same across categories of Police Station.

Discussion

This study was conducted at GMCH Chandigarh. This institution has jurisdiction to conduct postmortem examination of cases of Union territory (UT) Chandigarh and all the admitted and brought dead cases of other region. Majority of cases were from the Chandigarh, Punjab and Haryana. Out of 2072 medicolegal autopsy conducted, viscera were sent for analysis in 655 cases. Viscera was sent for analysis only in cases where cause of death was not certain after the autopsy, poisoning cases, sudden death, road traffic cases having suspicion of intoxication and in cases of suicidal/homicidal hanging to rule out concomitant intoxication. Viscera is usually handed over to the concerned police official after the autopsy on same day, who then first takes it to the Police store room (Malkhana) and then to the concerned laboratory. After the analysis of viscera, laboratory personnel make a report which is sent to the concerned autopsy surgeon, who then send this report in original to the concerned police official, after taking the photocopy of the same for the departmental record. When police officer receives both the reports, he writes a request to the concerned autopsy surgeon for the final opinion of cause of death. Final opinion is usually given within three days by the doctor on duty. The study calculated the time taken by different stack holders at each step. It could be assumed that practically a minimum time must be required at each step, which cannot be zero. 11, 12 Time taken by police department to deposit the viscera to FSL or Pathology department collected from the department of forensic medicine may depends upon the distance between the labs which varied highly among various FSL. Once at the lab, the time taken by Pathology department to finalizing the report may depends upon the minimum time required for various steps like formalin fixation, grossing, embedding, sectioning, staining and finally reporting. 13, 14, 15, 16 Similarly, time taken by the FSL to finalizing the report may well depend upon the minimum time required for processing of the sample. 17 Overburdening of labs may be another independent factor.

This delay can be divided into two groups, 1st pre-analysis delay and 2nd post analysis delay, both are having different consequences. Pre-analysis delay may lead to the decomposition of viscera. In police custody viscera is usually kept at room temperature so any undue delay by police can result in decomposition of viscera and subsequently to the negative autopsy. Post analysis delay which includes delay at the level of police and by the autopsy surgeon in forwarding the viscera report and in giving final opinion. It may impact the justice, of course which is also impacted by the pre-analysis delay. In our study 63 percent cases are still waiting for the final disposal, it has been proved in previous studies that if the delay is more than 3 years, viscera analysis is just a formality because tissue gets decomposed. 18, 19, 20, 21 Further studies are required to determine the various cause of delay at each step, and then the strategy to mitigate the same could be planned. Whatever may be the reason, the undue delay in reporting of viscera is such a well-known fact, that receiving a report even after a yearlong time also is considered as normal.

Conclusion

Death of dear ones is a great loss to the family. It is their right to know about the cause of death. Post-mortem report is also essential in insurance claims and other medicolegal issues. The autopsy surgeon, pathologist, chemical examiner and police personnel should try to avoid undue delay in final disposal of the case. Though due to lack of manpower, an enormous work load in police departments and hospitals, the very process gets delayed. Delay can be reduced by getting the histopathological examination work done by forensic expert, by setting up new histopathology laboratory in the forensic medicine department and by sensitize the concerned staff towards the nature of work and the consequences of delay. The establishing of new Forensic Science Laboratory in this region may reduce the burden and lead to timely disposal of such cases.

Limitations of Study

Issues while collecting the information from the old records. Few cases were excluded because of the nonavailability of important dates (misprint, illegible handwriting).

Ethical Approval

The ethical approval was taken from Institutional ethics and research Committee.

Source of Funding

None.

Conflict of Interest

There is no conflict of interests.

References

1 

Ksn Reddy O P Murty The essentials of forensic medicine & toxicologyJaypee Brothers Medical PublishersNew Delhi201797125

2 

J Belur N Tilley D Osrin N Daruwalla M Kumar V Tiwari Police investigations: discretion denied yet undeniably exercised201425439462Policing Soc

4 

Krishan Vij Text book of forensic medicine and toxicology20111735Elsevier India Private Ltd

5 

Aggarwal A Text book of forensic medicine and toxicology5976

6 

R B Kotabagi S C Charati D Jayachandar Clinical Autopsy vs Medicolegal Autopsy. Med J Armed Forces India20056125863

7 

V Verma M S Sankhla R Kumar Medicolegal Autopsy and Post-Mortem Examination in Female Victims of Crime: When and WhyIndian Journal of Legal Medicine2019126573

8 

Services under Right to Service Act Chandigarh. Available from

9 

Services under Right to Service Act. Punjab. Available from

10 

Aggarwal A Text book of forensic medicine and toxicology119166

11 

P Khare R Gupta M Ahuja N Khare Agarwal D Bansal Prevalence of Lung Lesions at Autopsy: A Histopathological StudyJ Clin of Diagn Res2017115

12 

Eva & Ostertagova Ostertag Jozef Oskar & Kováč Methodology and Application of the Kruskal-Wallis Test. Applied Mechanics and Materials20146111520

13 

A Sadeghipour P Babaheidarian Making Formalin-Fixed, Paraffin Embedded BlocksMethods Mol Biol2019189725368

14 

K Nadesan The importance of the medico-legal autopsyMalays J Pathol1997192105114

15 

I B Dimenstein Grossing Technology Today and TomorrowLab Med2020514337381

16 

J Fronczek F Hollingbury M Biggs G Rutty The role of histology in forensic autopsies: is histological examination always necessary to determine a cause of death?Forensic Sci Med Pathol2014103943

17 

R Dettmeyer The role of histopathology in forensic practice: an overviewForensic Sci Med Pathol2014103401413

18 

A Yadav A Dey Kulbhushan N Sharma S Gupta Viscera Analysis in India: Current Scenario, Problems & Suggestions- One Year Study of Autopsy Cases Where Viscera Had Been PreservedJournal of Forensic Chemistry and Toxicology20181458

19 

M K Mohanty P Siddhartha M Arun R G Menezes V Palimar Correlation between Postmortem diagnosis and survival time in poisoning deathsJ Ind Acad Forensic Medicine20052712327

20 

A K Pathak B Rathod A Mahajan Significance of Gastric Lavage in Viscera of Death Due to PoisoningJInd Acad Forensic Medicine201335179

21 

Y Malik R R Chaliha P Malik M Jaswal Toxicology Unit in Department of Forensic Medicine Emphasis from a Study from North East IndiaJ Ind Acad Forensic Medicine20123442327



jats-html.xsl


This is an Open Access (OA) journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.

Article type

Original Article


Article page

154-159


Authors Details

Sandeep Raju, Dasari Harish, Amandeep Singh, Dalip Vaishnav, Gagandeep Kalsi


Article History

Received : 08-04-2023

Accepted : 25-09-2023


Article Metrics


View Article As

 


Downlaod Files