Back
2018 Supreme(Cal) 378
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT CALCUTTA
I.P. MUKERJI, AMRITA SINHA, JJ.
Snigdhendu Ghosh - Appellant
Vs.
State of West Bengal & Ors. - Respondents
MAT 28 of 2018
Decided On : 19-07-2018
For the Appellants : Mr. Pratik Dhar, Mr. Vivekananda Bose, Mr. Samir Halder, Mr. Arka Kumar Nag
For the Respondents: Mr. Saibalendu Bhowmick, Ms. Manisha Bhowmick, Mr. Biplab Guha
Headnote:
The appellant, a medical practitioner, was charged with infamous conduct and his name was removed from the register of medical practitioners for a period of one year. The appellant challenged the order of the West Bengal Medical Council (WBMC) and the appellate authority. The court held that the appellant's conduct did not amount to infamous conduct and that the punishment of removal of his name from the register of medical practitioners was patently illegal and a gross violation of the principles of natural justice, equity, and fair play. The court set aside the impugned orders and directed the WBMC to re-enter the appellant's name in the register of medical practitioners immediately.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant, a medical practitioner, was charged with infamous conduct and his name was removed from the register of medical practitioners for a period of one year. The appellant challenged the order of the West Bengal Medical Council (WBMC) and the appellate authority.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the appellant's conduct did not amount to infamous conduct and that the punishment of removal of his name from the register of medical practitioners was patently illegal and a gross violation of the principles of natural justice, equity, and fair play.
Issues: Whether the appellant's conduct amounted to infamous conduct.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the appellant's conduct did not amount to infamous conduct because: * The appellant was not charged with administering three antibiotics negligently, yet he was tried for it. * The appellant used his clinical judgment to prescribe three antibiotics, as there was no facility for blood test at the hospital. * The patient's condition worsened only from 27th December, 2010 and that the worsening of her condition was not due to any action on the part of the appellant. * The WBMC did not give reasons for its decision, which is a violation of the principles of natural justice.
Final Decision: The court set aside the impugned orders and directed the WBMC to re-enter the appellant's name in the register of medical practitioners immediately.
I.P. MUKERJI, J.
1. I have had the privilege of going through the draft judgment prepared by my sister Amrita Sinha, J. I agree with the conclusions reached by her ladyship. Nevertheless, since this matter is of great importance I would like to deliver a separate concurring judgment.
2. The appellant is a very qualified and senior medical practitioner. In 1987, he obtained the MBBS degree from the Medical College, Kolkata. Thereafter, in 1992, he got the DCH qualification from Chittaranjan Seva Sadan, Kolkata. In 2009 he obtained MD in Pediatrics and DM in neurology from PGIMER, Chandigarh. He worked in the Dhanbad Railway hospital as paediatrician and thereafter with B.R. Singh Hospital. Now, he specialises in neurology and works with K.G. Hospital, in Chittaranjan, district Bardhaman.
3. It so happened that on or about 24th December, 2010 the regular ward doctors of the hospital were on leave. The appellant was in charge, although he was a specialist in neuroscience. On that day, a young girl Purbasha Das of about 19 years of age was admitted to the hospital. Such admission was made on the advice of the out-door doctor. She was suffering from fever for two or three days accompanied by loose motion and nausea. The hospital had no blood testing facility. On clinical examination of the patient, the appellant prescribed a combination of two antibiotics and supporting drugs and IV fluid, namely, Cefotaxime, Ofloxacin, Rantac injection Paracetamol and IV fluid. Later, on 25th December, 2010 on receipt of blood test reports, including the report of Widal test he advised the addition of a third antibiotic, Chloromycetin, suspecting typhoid. The patient remained under his care till 26th December, 2010. According to the statement made by the appellant before the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, West Bengal, in the case subsequently started against him, CC Case No. 40 of 2012, “the patient was responding to the treatment and her condition quite stable and improving till 26th December, 2010.”
4. From 27th December, 2010 the appellant relinquished charge of the ward. Dr. Dipanjan Basak took charge of the patient.
5. The patient sharply deteriorated on 29th December, 2010. She developed acute respiratory complication. A chest x-ray was performed. She was then released from K. G. Hospital by her family and taken to Mission Hospital, Duragapur. She was admitted there on 30th December, 2010 in the very early hours, at 12.40 a.m. This hospital made the diagnosis that she was suffering from septicemia with multi organ failure. The chest x-ray and CT scan revealed pulmonary oedema and Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS). She expired that very night at 4.50 a.m. In the death certificate the cause of death was stated to be acute respiratory distress syndrome together with sepsis plus multiple organ dysfunction syndromes.
6. On 12th January, 2011 Mr. Himangsu Kumar Das father of Purbasha Das made a complaint to the Officer-in-Charge of Chittranjan Police Station, Chittaranjan, West Bengal against the appellant, alleging criminal negligence. On 13th January, 2011 the police drew up an FIR (FIR No. 1 of 2011 dated 13th January, 2011) against him and Dr. Dipanjan Basak alleging commission of death by negligence under Section 304A of the Indian Penal Code.
7. On 18th March, 2011 the family of the deceased addressed a complaint to the Registrar, West Bengal Medical Council and others, including the Medical Council of India.
8. Now, further to the complaint of Mr. Himangsu Kumar Das the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Asansol on 2nd April, 2013 constituted a Medical Board consisting of the ACMOH, Asansol, Dr. Nilanjan Chattopadhya and Dr. Srikanta Gongopadhya. This Medical Board opined that the medicines prescribed by the appellant were adequate for enteric fever and pneumonia.
9. The family of the deceased did not stop there. They moved the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. They did not prosecute the matte
