``We have received the show-cause notices issued by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate and have already moved the Bombay High Court. Our petition has been admitted,'' Uppe told Express Newsline when he was contacted.

``I have expressed an opinion to the effect that you as witness when appearing in the case had knowingly or wilfully given false evidence or had fabricated evidence with an intention that such evidence should be used in the proceedings. I have also expressed my opinion that I am satisfied that it is necessaryand expedient in the interest of justice that you should be tried summarily for giving or fabricating false evidence in the case,'' the magistrate has observed.

The Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate has now asked them to show-cause as to why they should not be punished by summary trial and sentence of imprisonment for a term which may extend to three months or a fine of Rs 500 or both.

The brief history of the case is that a female patient died on the operating table at the government-run M G M Hospital on July 21, 1989. The doctors, who performed the post-mortem - A G Shinde, D R Vaze and Pradnya Mulgaonkar - submitted that the death was unnatural and the same was confirmed by Uppe. On the basis of the observations of these doctors, the police registered a case of death due to negligence against Dr Kamini Naik, who had performed the operation.

However, later while deposing in the case Uppe and three others changed their opinion and said there was no negligence on the part of Dr Naik. Uppemaintained that the initial opinion was given by him on the basis of the documents submitted before him. ``In such cases, our opinion is never final unless all the relevant documents are placed before me. The initial opinion is for the guidance of the investigating officials,'' he added.

In his 24-page order, Holambe Patil observed the opinion on the point of cause of death was not all consistent with the evidence given by them and was also not consistent with the settled principle of medical jurisprudence. ``On one side Uppe has confirmed the findings of the post-mortem, and on the other side, it is astonishing and shocking that he has deposed on oath that the opinion given by him, which led to registration of the case, is false.''

The judge observed the three doctors who performed post-mortem too have turned hostile and evidence of Vaze and Shinde shows they had changed their opinion without enough reason.