Every Death In Hospital Does Not Amount To Medical Negligence : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court bench of Justice D. Y. Chandrachud, Justice A. S. Bopanna and Justice J. B. Pardiwala was hearing a civil appeal assailing a judgment and order passed by the NCDRC by which a complaint regarding alleged medical negligence and deficiency in service was dismissed on the ground that the case was not established conclusively.

The NCDRC was hearing a matter where it was submitted by the Complainant that her husband was brought into the hospital through the casualty entrance complaining of vomiting. After being examined in the Casualty Ward he again vomited and complained about breathlessness. The doctors administered an injection to the patient after which the patient developed cramps and fell unconscious. The family was removed from the casualty ward in a very unruly manner and was informed that the patient had 70% blockage in the arteries.

It was submitted by the Complainant that despite repeatedly requesting the Hospital Staff to call the Cardiologist, he was not called. Around midnight the patient was shifted to the ICU and at 1.06 am the patient was declared dead. The Complainant had filed a case against the Hospital and the Staff alleging that no proper explanation for the cause of death for her husband was given, no proper records were given and the treatment was done in a casual manner. She had prayed for a compensation of Rs. 7 crores with 18% interest and Rs. 3 crores for mental agony.

The Hospital and the staff denied the allegation of medical negligence. They also submitted that the fact that the patient was suffering from diabetes was suppressed by the patient and his wife. It was submitted before the NCDRC that the proper procedure was followed by the hospital and the entire cardiology and critical care team under the supervision of the Cardiologist, however the patient could not be revived and died.

The Counsel for the Hospital and the Staff submitted that the patient was administered an injection for nausea and acidity when the patient was brought in and an ECG test was done which was observed by a cardiology resident who was on duty and showed subtle changes, the senior doctor was immediately informed. Later the patient developed severe breathlessness and suffered a massive heart attack. The staff made all the efforts to revive the patient but failed and the patient was declared dead.

It was also submitted that the Complainants had approached the NCDRC with malafide intent and unclean hands. The NCDRC had after hearing the submissions of the parties and taking into account the decisions taken by the Supreme Court dismissed the petition.

Aggrieved by the order of the NCDRC the complainant had approached the Supreme Court where the bench held in its order that, "Unless the appellants are able to establish before this Court any specific course of conduct suggesting a lack of due medical attention and care, it would not be possible for the Court to second-guess the medical judgment of the doctors on the line of medical treatment which was administered to the spouse of the first appellant. In the absence of any such material disclosing medical negligence, we find no justification to form a view at variance with the view which was taken by the NCDRC." The Court thus dismissed the appeal.