Back
A Fatal Surgical Disaster: NCDRC Holds Surgeon Accountable for Removing Healthy Kidney
In a landmark verdict that reiterates the sanctity of patient safety, the has ordered a surgeon to pay ₹2 crore in compensation for "." The case involves the tragic death of Smt. Shanti Devi, whose healthy kidney was removed, leaving her with a dysfunctional organ that ultimately led to her passing.
The Anatomy of a Medical Tragedy In , Shanti Devi sought treatment at for severe abdominal pain. Diagnostic reports, including an ultrasound and IVP, confirmed that while her right kidney was suffering from hydronephrosis, her left kidney was perfectly healthy. The surgical plan was clear: perform a right-sided nephrectomy to remove the diseased organ.
However, in a turn of events that the NCDRC described as a "," the surgery resulted in the removal of the patient’s healthy left kidney, while the diseased right kidney was left untouched. Faced with a failing organ and the trauma of an unnecessary surgery, Shanti Devi required dialysis for two years before succumbing to complications in .
The Surgeon’s Defense: A Failed Argument Dr. Rajeev Lochan, the operating surgeon, attempted to defend his actions by arguing that it was anatomically impossible to remove a left kidney through a right-flank incision. He claimed this was a "misadventure" and that he could not have imagined such an error during the procedure.
The NCDRC, led by President Justice A. P. Sahi and Member Bharatkumar Pandya, summarily rejected this defense. The Commission noted that the surgeon himself had recorded "right side nephrectomy" in the hospital’s post-operative documentation, yet pathology reports confirmed the removed organ was the left kidney. The bench highlighted that the presence of the diseased kidney on the right side post-surgery proved that the operation had failed to address the primary medical issue.
Key Observations The judgment offers a scathing critique of the surgeon's conduct, emphasizing the absence of professional diligence:
-
"The removal of the left kidney was a and a of the highest order. Had the left kidney remained intact, the patient would have survived longer."
-
"There is no explanation by the OP as to how did the left side kidney went missing when there was only one surgery performed."
-
"This is one of those that is rarely witnessed for a judicial approximation before Courts and Tribunals."
-
"The has categorically recorded that the OP had no explanation as to how the left kidney was removed and that he never attempted to ascertain whether it was the left or the right kidney."
Accountability and Legal Precedent The NCDRC’s decision aligns with earlier findings by the Uttar Pradesh Medical Council, which had suspended the doctor’s license after discovering that he had submitted a "forged case sheet" in his defense. The subsequently upheld this disciplinary action. By rejecting the surgeon’s reliance on the Bolam test and general anatomical impossibility arguments, the NCDRC has reaffirmed that when medical documentation and clear pre-operative evidence contradict a surgeon’s claim, the for "" is absolute.
Seeking Justice for Irreparable Loss The Commission awarded a lump sum of ₹1.5 crore for , plus ₹10 lakh to each family member for emotional distress, and . The interest rate was set at 6% from the date of death, escalating to 9% if the surgeon defaults on the payment.
While no monetary value can replace the loss of a loved one, this order serves as a stark warning to the medical fraternity regarding the necessity of rigorous surgical checklists and ethical transparency. The NCDRC has effectively sent a message that in matters of life and death, "imagined" medical accidents provide no shield against legal accountability.
