IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GURPAL SINGH AHLUWALIA ON THE

4th OF JULY, 2024 WRIT PETITION No. 16032 of 2024 (PRAMOD PATEL Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)

Appearance (SHRI SHANKAR PRASAD SINGH- ADVOCATE FOR PETITIONER)

(SMT. SWATI ASEEM GEORGE- DEPUTY GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT/STATE)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ORDER

This petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India has been filed seeking the following reliefs:-

7.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus, or any other writ direction or order and accordingly direct the respondent no. 3 to constitute a high level committee for conducting detailed enquiry of the case and in case if the respondent no. 6 be found guilty for his involvement of negligence, then he be punished as per the penal provision of the Indian Penal Code.

7.2 Any other order or direction which is deemed fit under the circumstances of the case may kindly be granted for the interest of justice.

2. It is submitted by counsel for petitioner that the mother of the petitioner was a Diabetic and since she had pain in her teeth, therefore, the son of the petitioner took her to clinic of respondent No. 6. The respondent No. 6 without carrying out the test with regard to Diabetes of his mother, removed the teeth and as per the instructions given by respondent No. 6, Dalia and Ice Cream was given to his mother. After the medicines were taken by her, she went to sleep in the night. Thereafter she did not wake up in the morning. At about 10:00 AM when wife of petitioner tried to wake up her, then she found that the mouth and eyes of his mother were not working, whereas; her hands and legs were properly working. She was immediately taken to Metro Hospital and was admitted in ICU. At about 04:00 PM, he made a telephonic call to respondent No. 6 who informed that since there were lot of patients in his clinic, therefore, he had removed the teeth without checking the sugar of his mother. When the mother of the petitioner could not recover, then he took her to Nelson Hospital at Nagpur where she remained hospitalized for 9 days. According to the Doctors, on account of removal of teeth, pus had developed in the head and ultimately she died on 12.01.2024. Thus, it was claimed that mother of the petitioner has expired on account of incorrect treatment given by respondent No. 6.

3. The CMHO constituted a committee of two doctors who have submitted their report that all precautions were taken by respondent No.6 after the removal of teeth. After the teeth was removed haemostesis had also developed and it was also opined that it appears that no complication took place because of removal of teeth.

4. As per the death summary given by the Nelson Hospital, Nagpur the cause of death was Septicemia, with shock, acute kidney injury with subdural empyema type II DM and according to the committee it was not the consequence of any complication on account of removal of teeth. Thus, it is clear that the committee has given clean chit to respondent No. 6.

5. It is submitted by counsel for petitioner that since the report is not prepared properly, therefore, respondent No. 3 may be directed to constitute a high level committee for conducting detailed enquiry of the case and if respondent No. 6 is found guilty, then he should be prosecuted.

6. Considered the submissions made by counsel for petitioner.

7. Medical science is an specialized field and only the experts can give an opinion as to whether the doctor was negligent in treating the patient or not?

8. The Supreme Court in the case of Jacob Mathew Vs. State of Punjab reported in (2005) 6 SCC 1 has held as under:-

“48. We sum up our conclusions as under:-

(1) Negligence is the breach of a duty caused by omission to do something which a reasonable man guided by those considerations which ordinarily regulate the co