Aim: The aim of the present study was to assess primary closure versus open skin technique (laparostomy) in emergency laparotomy for perforative peritonitis and blunt abdominal trauma.Methods: A comprehensive observational and prospective study of Primary closure and open skin technique with regard to surgical site infections, duration of hospital stay and morbidity following various aetiologies of perforative peritonitis requiring emergency laparotomy. i.e. observation and descriptive study with a sample size of 60.Results: Among patients who underwent primary closure, 42.9% developed SSI. This was statistically significant (p = 0.004). Therefore, DPC results in significant decrease in SSI. Among the patients, 6.66% had fascial dehiscence in open skin group and 13.34% in primary closure group. Length of hospital stay was comparable in the two groups (average 13.52 days in DPC group and 14.07 days in PC group; p = 0.586).Conclusion: Each SSI, on an average, increases the hospital stay by approximately 5 days. Delayed primary closure significantly reduces the incidence of SSI in perforative peritonitis patients, compared to primary closure. However, it takes quite a while (on an average, 9.2 days) before such wounds become infection-free and appropriate for closure. As a result, the length of hospital stay in delayed primary closure is comparable to that in primary closure patients. Incidence of fascial dehiscence was also comparable in both group.