A 10 year Review of Judgments on Alleged Medical Negligence Cases by the Supreme Court of India
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.48165/jiafm.2024.46.1(Suppl).21Keywords:
Consumer protection act, Judgment, Medical negligence, Medical records, Supreme court.Abstract
Doctors have obligations to their patients, and if those obligations are broken, they may be considered negligent. More than ever, Indians are aware of their rights as consumers under the Consumer Protection Act (CPA). As a result, more people are suing doctors for medical negligence and turning to redressal forums for assistance in minimising their loss or harm. As a result, it is necessary to recognise and take care of the crucial elements that influence how a case of alleged medical negligence is decided. For this study, a review of rulings from the period of January 2012 to December 2021 (10 years) was taken from the Supreme Court website using a free text search for the term "medical negligence". 63 judgements in total were discovered; 34 of these were excluded, and 29 were included in this study. When compared to medical specialties, surgical specialties are at a higher risk of being sued for medical negligence, according to the examination of the rulings. The majority of lawsuits were brought against obstetrics and gynaecology. Overall, the result favoured doctors and hospitals in 55.2% of the decisions. Medical records were a major factor in the decision in 87.5% of all verdicts in favour of the doctor or hospital. The medical community must accept that there is significant space for improvement in patient care since medical negligence lawsuits against doctors continue to be a major problem in India.
Downloads
References
Indian Medical Association v. V.P. Shanta & Ors. III (1995) CPJ 1 (SC).
Bardale RV, Haridas SV, Dixit PG. Analysis of Alleged Medical Negligence Cases Referred for Opinion - A Retrospective Study. J For Med Sci Law. 2021;30(2):27–30.
Wu AW. Medical error: The second victim. BMJ. 2000;320:726–7.
Shenoy J. Negligence major reasons for rise in cases of medical litigation: NLSIU survey. The Times of India. 2015 [cited 2022 Apr 11]; Available from: https://timesofindia. indiatimes.com/city/mangaluru/
Modgil V, Dasari H, Singh A. Study of medical negligence cases decided by the state consumer disputes redressal commissions of Chandigarh, Punjab and Haryana. J Ind Acad Foren Med. 2021;43(2):149–53.
Vora DH, Patel AP. An evaluation of medical negligence cases: Role and contribution of medico-legal autopsy. J Ind Acad Foren Med. 2020;42(1):7–12.
Rayamane AP, Nanandkar SD, Kundargi PA. Profile of medical negligence cases in India. J Ind Acad Foren Med. 2016;38(2):144–8.
Janani S, Pathak D, Kochar S, Temani BC. A Review of Second Medical Opinion Cases and Its Attribute to Medical Negligence - A Retrospective Study. J Ind Acad Foren Med. 2010;32(3):216–9.
Yadav M, Rastogi P. A study of medical negligence cases decided by the district consumer courts of Delhi. J Ind Acad Foren Med. 2015;37(1):50–5.
Patekar MB, Zine KU, Wasnik RN. Profile of cases of alleged medical negligence at tertiary care centre: A retrospective study. Indian J Forensic Med Toxicol. 2019;13(1):89–93.
Hassan DAE, Shehab AM, Kotb H. Alleged Medical Malpractice: ARetrospective Study of Forensic Evaluation of Cases in Cairo and Giza regions-Egypt (2009-2011). J Forensic Res. 2014;05(239).
Casali MB, Mobilia F, Sordo SD, Blandino A, Genovese U. The medical malpractice in Milan-Italy. A retrospective survey on 14 years of judicial autopsies. Forensic Sci Int. 2014;242:38–43.
Yazıcı YA, Şeen H, Aliustaoğlu S, Sezer Y, İnce CH. Evaluation of the medical malpractice cases concluded in the general assembly of council of forensic medicine. Ulusal Travma ve Acil Cerrahi Dergisi. 2015;21(3):204–8.
Madea B, Preuß J. Medical malpractice as reflected by the forensic evaluation of 4450 autopsies. Forensic Sci Int. 2009;190:58–66.
He F, Li L, Bynum J, Meng X, Yan P, Li L, et al. Medical Malpractice in Wuhan, China: A 10 Year Autopsy Based Single Center Study. Medicine (Quality Improvement Study). 2015;94(45):1–10.
Kohli S v. Dr. Prabha Manchanda & Anr. (2008) 2 SCC 1.
Maharaja Agrasen Hospital & Ors. v. Master Rishabh Sharma & Ors., (2020) 6 SCC 501.
Wadhawan DA. Booked for murder, Rajasthan doctor dies by suicide, leaves note “Stop harassing doctors.” India Today. 2022 [cited 2022 Apr 11]; Available from: https://www. indiatoday.in/india/story/booked-murder-rajasthan-doctor
dies-suicide-leaves-note-stop-harassing-doctors-1931681- 2022-03-31
Bolam v. Friern Hospital Management Committee (1957) 1
WLR 582.
Rogers v. Whitaker (1992) 75 CLR 479 .
Bolitho v. City and Hackney Health Authority (1997) 3 WLR 1151 .
Foo Fio Na v. Dr. Soo Fook Mun (2007) 1 MLJ 593. 23. Montgomery v. Lanarkshire Health Board (2015) AC 1430
Thomas J. Medical records and issues in negligence. Indian J Urol. 2009;25(3):384–8.
Rao SVJ. Medical negligence liability under the consumer protection act: Areview of judicial perspective. Indian J Urol. 2009;25(3):361–71.
Dash SK. Medical Ethics, Duties and Medical Negligence Awareness among the Practitioners in a teaching Medical College Hospital – A Survey. J Ind Acad Foren Med. 2010;32(2):153–6.
Ballur MS. Assessing the knowledge about Consumer Protection Act and medical negligence in a medical college setting. J Ind Acad Foren Med. 2020;42(1):54–6.
Indian Medical Council (Professional Conduct, Etiquette and Ethics) Regulations. Medical Council of India. 2002. Available from: https://www.tamilnadumedicalcouncil.org /info/acts/v1-ethics-regulations-2002
Draft of Registered Medical Practitioner (Professional Conduct) Regulations. National Medical Commission. 2022. Dated 23rd May 2022. Available from: https:// www.nmc.org.in/MCIRest/open/getDocument?path=/ Documents/Public/Portal/LatestNews/NMC%20RMP%20 REGULATIONS%202022%20Draft%20Final%20YM.pdf
