IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Manmohan, Mini Pushkarna, JJ.
Bhushan Kumar Singhal - Appellant
Versus
National Medical Commission & Ors. - Respondents
LPA 750 of 2023 & CM Appls. 59758-59759 of 2023
Decided On : 20-11-2023
Medical Negligence - Medical Treatment - Indian Medical Council Act - Delhi Medical Council - National Medical Commission - [Indian Medical Council Act, Delhi Medical Council Order dated 04th July, 2017, Delhi Medical Council Order dated 01st January, 2018, National Medical Commission Order dated 08th August, 2019] - The court upheld the findings of the medical expert bodies that there was no medical negligence and professional misconduct on behalf of the respondents. The court also noted that the appellant approached the court with unclean hands by suppressing material information.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant's brother passed away after receiving medical treatment. The appellant alleged medical negligence and filed complaints with various medical councils and authorities. The medical expert bodies concluded that there was no medical negligence. The appellant approached the court seeking cancellation of the medical license of the respondents and setting aside the expert bodies' decisions.
Finding of the Court:
The court upheld the findings of the medical expert bodies that there was no medical negligence and professional misconduct on behalf of the respondents. The court also noted that the appellant approached the court with unclean hands by suppressing material information.
Issues: Allegations of medical negligence, suppression of material information by the appellant, and the court's jurisdiction to interfere with the findings of medical expert bodies.
Ratio Decidendi: The court will not interfere with the opinion of medical experts unless in rare and exceptional cases. A litigant who hides facts which are in his knowledge has no right to be heard on the merits of his grievances.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal and the pending applications.
JUDGMENT
1. The present appeal has been filed challenging the judgment dated 05th October, 2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) 12723/2021. By the impugned judgment, the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition filed on behalf of the appellant by which the appellant had sought cancellation of license of practice of respondent nos. 3 to 5 herein with further prayer for setting aside the order dated 08th August, 2019 passed by the National Medical Commission.
2. Facts of the case in brief are as follows:
2.1. The brother of the appellant, Mr. Pawan Kumar experienced minor chest pain at his residence in Kurukshetra on 28th March, 2016. The appellant along with his brother consulted respondent no.3, namely, Dr. B.B. Chanana. The said doctor prescribed medicines and suggested admitting the brother of the appellant in Maharaja Agrasen Hospital, New Delhi as he required urgent treatment. Thus, the brother of the appellant was admitted in Maharaja Agrasen Hospital on 31st March, 2016.
2.2. Emergency angiography was conducted on the brother of the appellant. After assessing his situation, the family members present in the Cath Lab were advised immediate PTCA treatment, which is a minimal invasive treatment for opening blocked coronary arteries to increase the blood flow with stenting the left interior descending (LAD) artery. However, the said procedure could not be undertaken by the doctors owing to the time taken by the family to arrive at a decision. In the meantime, the health situation of the brother of the appellant deteriorated and he was put on life saving ventilator. Shortly thereafter, brother of the appellant passed away on 01st April, 2016 after he suffered a heart attack.
2.3. The appellant filed a complaint against the respondent nos. 3 to 5 before Police Station, Rohini North. The police station referred the complaint to respondent no.2, i.e., Delhi Medical Council. The Delhi Medical Council by its order dated 04th July, 2017 concluded that the deceased was treated as per the accepted professional practice and no case of medical negligence was made out.
2.4. The appellant thereafter approached the Delhi Medical Council alleging medical negligence in the nature and manner of treatment administered to his brother under the Indian Medical Council Act. The Delhi Medical Council reiterated its earlier findings and by its order dated 01st January, 2018 held that no medical negligence was made out in the treatment administered to the deceased brother of the appellant.
2.5. Appellant thereafter filed an appeal before the erstwhile Medical Council of India (now National Medical Commission) challenging the order dated 04th July, 2017 passed by the Delhi Medical Council. By its order dated 08th August, 2019, the erstwhile Medical Council of India (now National Medical Commission) upheld the order dated 04th July, 2017 passed by the Delhi Medical Council and found no negligence on behalf of respondent nos. 3 to 5 in treating the brother of the appellant.
2.6. Additionally, the appellant also filed a complaint on 24th August, 2018 against the Maharaja Agrasen Hospital with the Chief Minister of Delhi during the Chief Minister's Janta Samvad. Thus, vide order dated 31st August, 2018, a Committee was directed to be constituted by the Chief Minister of Delhi under the Directorate General of Health Services, Delhi to enquire into the case regarding any negligence by the said hospital in giving treatment to the appellant's brother. The said Committee conducted an enquiry and issued a final enquiry report dated 19th February, 2019 thereby concluding that the case of the brother of the appellant was handled as per medical practice and in line with the acceptable protocol.
2.7. Subsequently, the petitioner again made representation before the Chief Minister to reconsider and reconstitute the committee to initiate a fresh enquiry. Thus, vide order dated 08th May, 2019, the Chief Minister directed the Department of Health and Fami
Healthcare providers must adhere to the standard of care associated with their qualifications, reinforcing medical negligence principles.
A medical practitioner misrepresenting qualifications and providing treatment without specialization may be deemed negligent, necessitating reevaluation of prior findings by regulatory bodies.
A professional may be held liable for negligence, if he was not possessed of requisite skills which he professed to have possessed.
(1) Pancreatitis – Pancreatitis could be detected only much later but OPs cannot be held responsible.(2) Negligence – The patient’s treatment was based on from OP No.3, which further underscores negl....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.