Supreme Court: Negligence Applies If Doctors Lack Skill
In a recent ruling, the Supreme Court clarified that doctors can only be held liable for negligence if they lack proper qualifications or fail to apply their medical expertise adequately during treatment. This verdict was issued while overturning an earlier decision by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC), which had found a doctor and the Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education & Research (PGIMER) in Chandigarh guilty of negligence in a 1996 eye surgery case.
Background: A Long-standing Case of Alleged Negligence
The case began when the parents of a minor filed a complaint, alleging medical negligence by Dr. Neeraj Sud, a doctor at PGIMER, following a minor eye surgery on their son. The child had a congenital condition in his left eye that, according to the parents, required a straightforward procedure to lift the eyelid slightly for symmetry with the right eye. They claimed that the doctor’s handling of the procedure worsened their son’s condition.
Â
Initially, the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission dismissed the negligence claim in 2005, siding with the doctor and the hospital. However, upon appeal, the NCDRC found Dr. Sud and PGIMER jointly responsible, ordering them to pay a compensation of ₹3.5 lakh.
Supreme Court's Analysis and Verdict
When the case reached the Supreme Court, the complainants failed to provide sufficient evidence to substantiate their claim of negligence. The bench, comprising Justices P. S. Narasimha and Pankaj Mithal, observed that complications after surgery do not automatically imply negligence or inadequate care by a medical professional.
Â
The bench emphasized that successful treatment is not always guaranteed, as some procedures might have unpredictable outcomes, including rare complications. The court remarked that surgery does not always have to lead to improvement or satisfaction for the patient. Unexpected complications alone do not establish actionable negligence by the medical professional.”
Verdict Overturned Due to Lack of Evidence
The Supreme Court set aside the NCDRC’s ruling, asserting that without concrete evidence of malpractice or lack of expertise, there was no grounds for penalizing the doctor or PGIMER. The court concluded that the family was not entitled to any compensation as the standard of care expected from a medical professional had been reasonably met.
This ruling highlights the importance of a nuanced approach to assessing medical negligence, with the court reinforcing that only a lack of qualification or an evident failure to apply appropriate medical skill can constitute actionable negligence.
Source: Inputs from various media SourcesÂ
Priya Bairagi
I’m a pharmacist with a strong background in health sciences. I hold a BSc from Delhi University and a pharmacy degree from PDM University. I write articles and daily health news while interviewing doctors to bring you the latest insights. In my free time, you’ll find me at the gym or lost in a sci-fi novel.
