Hyderabad: The Hyderabad High Court has held that when a patient agrees to go for medical treatment or an operation, every careless act of a doctor cannot be termed as criminal. Justice B.S. Ravi Kumar was allowing a plea by Dr P. Malathi and Dr L. Sudhakar seeking to quash a criminal complaint against them in a lower court of the city.
While delivering the verdict, the judge relied on the decision of the House of Lords in the R.V. Adomako case, which said that a doctor cannot be held criminally responsible for a patient’s death unless his negligence or incompetence showed such disregard for 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 patient’s safety and which is found to have arisen from gross ignorance or negligence.”
The judge ruled that to attract offence of criminal medical negligence, the existence of the duty of the doctor, a breach of the duty causing death, and a breach of that duty characterised as gross negligence has to proved during the course of investigation.
In the present case, a woman had died during treatment at Shalini Nursing Home in the city. Her family had initially moved the consumer forum, which had held that there was no negligence on the doctors’ part.
The patient’s husband had also moved the AP Medical Council, and the Ethical and Malpractices Committee of the Council had said the same. The husband had also moved the Medical Council of India against Dr Sudhakar and the MCI had passed an order against the doctor, which was later set aside by the AP High Court.
Finally, the patient’s parents had initiated criminal proceedings against the doctors before a lower court of the city. However, the judge had found that the patient’s body had been taken away by family members without conducting the post-mortem.
The judge noted that the incident had taken place on March 6, 2003 and the complaint had been made before the Court on February 12, 2004. He said that if there had been a doubt, the complainant should not have waited for such so long.
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 deceased and the provisions of Section 304-A IPC are not applicable against the petitioners.”
The HC order quashing the complaint comes as a relief for doctors.
Dr Ruma Sinha, gynaecologist with Apollo Hospitals, said, “No doctor will make a mistake until and unless they are incompetent. There are strict protocols and various lines of treatment defined for doctors and every patient is evaluated accordingly. There is never any intention to harm a patient and the doctor will never do that. There can be a complication arising out of the condition and that can’t be termed as negligence.”
Similarly, there is too much activism on the consumer court front. Dr Yadgiri Rao, secretary, Indian Medical Association, said, “Too many cases are being filed by victims and doctors are practicing defensive medicine where there are too many tests, evaluations and investigations done. They are scared that they will be pulled up in Court. That is wrong.”
Maj. Dr S. Bakhtiar Choudhary, said, “A doctor can make an error, which would then prove the poor skills of the doctor, but not that he intentionally harmed the patient. The act of negligence arises when proper procedures are not followed or when there is lapse from the given set of rules. The doctors are highly trained and they try their best to save the patient.”
