In what might sound music to the ears of the medical fraternity, the Hyderabad high court has held that when a patient agrees to go for medical treatment or surgical operation, every careless act of the medical staff cannot be termed as criminal.
Justice B S Ravi Kumar gave the ruling while allowing a plea by Dr P Malathi and Dr L Sudhakar, who sought suspension of a criminal complaint against them in a lower court of the city. While delivering the verdict, the judge relied upon the decision of the British House of Lords in RV Adomako case, in which the they held that a doctor cannot be held criminally responsible for the death of patients unless his negligence or incompetence showed such disregard for the life and safety of his patient as to amount to a crime against the state.
Applying the findings to the present case, the judge said, "It can be termed criminal only when the medical man exhibits a gross lack of competence or inaction and wanton indifference to his patients' safety and which is found to have arisen from gross ignorance or gross negligence."
The present case arose when a woman brought for treatment at Shalini Nursing Home in the city died while under treatment. Her husband and parents initially moved the consumer forum, which held that there was no negligence on part of the doctors. The husband then moved the AP Medical Council and its Ethical and Malpractices Committee, which also ruled out negligence and said the woman had died due to a rare complication of Amniotic Fluid Embolism. The husband also moved the Medical Council of India against Dr Sudhakar and the MCI passed an order against the doctor, which was later set aside by the AP high court.
Later, the patient's parents initiated criminal proceedings against the doctors before a lower court in the city. After perusing the evidence on record and the legal position, the judge found that the patient's body was taken away by her family members without conducting the post-mortem. The judge also noted that the incident took place on March 6, 2003 and the complaint before the court was filed on Feb 12, 2004. If death was doubted, the complainant should not have waited for such a long time, they felt.
The judge pointed out that "it is not in dispute that the complainant is a senior advocate and the husband of the deceased a senior bureaucrat and both of them have not insisted on the post mortem and took the dead body, but have not raised even their little finger nearly for a year on this aspect"
Quashing the criminal proceedings, Justice Ravi Kumar said, "I am of the view that there is no material showing gross negligence or recklessness on the part of these two petitioners for the death of the deceased and the ingredients of Section 304-A of IPC are not at all attracted against the petitioners."
Article referred: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/hyderabad/Every-careless-act-of-doctors-not-criminal-HC/articleshow/38574547.cms
Justice B S Ravi Kumar gave the ruling while allowing a plea by Dr P Malathi and Dr L Sudhakar, who sought suspension of a criminal complaint against them in a lower court of the city. While delivering the verdict, the judge relied upon the decision of the British House of Lords in RV Adomako case, in which the they held that a doctor cannot be held criminally responsible for the death of patients unless his negligence or incompetence showed such disregard for the life and safety of his patient as to amount to a crime against the state.
Applying the findings to the present case, the judge said, "It can be termed criminal only when the medical man exhibits a gross lack of competence or inaction and wanton indifference to his patients' safety and which is found to have arisen from gross ignorance or gross negligence."
The present case arose when a woman brought for treatment at Shalini Nursing Home in the city died while under treatment. Her husband and parents initially moved the consumer forum, which held that there was no negligence on part of the doctors. The husband then moved the AP Medical Council and its Ethical and Malpractices Committee, which also ruled out negligence and said the woman had died due to a rare complication of Amniotic Fluid Embolism. The husband also moved the Medical Council of India against Dr Sudhakar and the MCI passed an order against the doctor, which was later set aside by the AP high court.
Later, the patient's parents initiated criminal proceedings against the doctors before a lower court in the city. After perusing the evidence on record and the legal position, the judge found that the patient's body was taken away by her family members without conducting the post-mortem. The judge also noted that the incident took place on March 6, 2003 and the complaint before the court was filed on Feb 12, 2004. If death was doubted, the complainant should not have waited for such a long time, they felt.
The judge pointed out that "it is not in dispute that the complainant is a senior advocate and the husband of the deceased a senior bureaucrat and both of them have not insisted on the post mortem and took the dead body, but have not raised even their little finger nearly for a year on this aspect"
Quashing the criminal proceedings, Justice Ravi Kumar said, "I am of the view that there is no material showing gross negligence or recklessness on the part of these two petitioners for the death of the deceased and the ingredients of Section 304-A of IPC are not at all attracted against the petitioners."
Article referred: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/hyderabad/Every-careless-act-of-doctors-not-criminal-HC/articleshow/38574547.cms
Comments
Post a Comment