NCDRC Dismisses Complaint Against Lala Lajpat Rai Memorial Medical College For Alleged Failure Of Premature Screening Of A 3-Week-Old Child

Brief Facts:

Dr. Amit Upadhyay ("Doctor") treated a premature baby named Palak Khan. The baby's parents claimed that the doctor failed to refer the child for mandatory Retinopathy or premature screening within the first 3 weeks of birth. They also alleged that the doctor did not follow proper medical protocols and did not inform them of potential complications. Palak Khan was born on 3.7.2015 and later admitted to the LLR Medical College ("Medical Institute") in Meerut. After multiple admissions and health issues, a deficiency in the child's eyesight was diagnosed, but it was too late to treat.

Firstly, the baby's parents filed a complaint with the Director General of Medical and Health Services, Uttar Pradesh. Several committees and inquiries were conducted, with varying conclusions. Initially, one committee found negligence by the Pediatrics Department, but subsequent reports and investigations cleared the doctor of any wrongdoing.

In response to the FIR filed by the baby's parents, the doctor approached the Allahabad High Court via a writ petition, seeking to quash the concerned FIR against him. The High Court quashed the criminal proceedings against him, citing the "Bolam test," which assesses medical negligence. Both the Medical Council of Uttar Pradesh and the Medical Council of India also cleared the doctor of negligence in their investigations. Aggrieved, the baby’s parents approached the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (“NCDRC”).

The baby's parents argued that they were never properly informed about the necessary medical procedures for their child, leading to a delay in treatment and causing harm. They asserted that this constitutes a case of gross medical negligence. On the other hand, the doctor contended that he acted with medical expertise, and all inquiries and committees found no evidence of negligence. He maintained that the complainants' claims lack merit.

Observations of the Commission:

The NCDRC perused the inquiry and committee reports which established that there was lack of medical negligence on the doctor’s part. The doctor and the medical institute also denied the allegations, stating that they followed standard protocols and provided necessary advice and care. Multiple inquiry reports and committees have found no evidence of negligence on their part.

The NCDRC also took additional evidence into consideration. While referring to the Discharge Slip issued to the complainants, the NCDRC observed that there was an endorsement for the ROP (Retinopathy of Prematurity) screening, which the complainants initially denied knowledge of but later disputed its existence. However, there was no substantial evidence to suggest tampering or manipulation of the Discharge Slip.

Ultimately, the complaint was dismissed. It was due to the lack of evidence showing medical negligence by the doctor and the medical institute.

Case Title: Baby Palak Khan and 2 others vs Dr. Amit Upadhyay and 2 others

Case No.: Consumer Case No. 1074 of 2016

Advocate for the Complainant: Mr Amit Wadhwa and Mr Aftab in-person

Advocate for the Opposite Parties: Mr Anoop Kaushal (For Opposite Party 1), Dr Amit Upadhyay (in-person) and Mr Ravi Gopal (For Opposite Parties 2 and 3)

Click Here To Read/Download The Order