Karnataka HC quashes medical negligence case against 3 doctors, notes expert’s opinion in their favour
The Karnataka High Court also pointed out that the chargesheet in the 2014 medical negligence case was not supported by a medical expert’s opinion.
3 min read
The counsel for the accused argued that the case should be quashed, relying on an expert medical opinion which was part of a Medical Council of India order. (file image) The Karnataka High Court has quashed a medical negligence case filed against three doctors, noting that a medical expert’s opinion was in their favour. The court also pointed out that the chargesheet was not substantiated by an expert’s opinion.
The order was passed on June 28 by a single-judge bench of Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum. The court was hearing a case related to a 2014 police complaint that alleged that the three doctors had not followed the standard protocols and guidelines while treating a pregnant woman who was hospitalised. The accused had moved court, seeking that the case be quashed.
“…. on perusal of the charge sheet it is quite surprising to note that though the investigating officer has submitted a charge sheet, the same is not supported by any expert’s opinion,” the bench said.
The counsel for the accused argued that the case should be quashed, relying on an expert medical opinion which was part of a Medical Council of India order. The prosecution, on the other hand, said that the facts had to be ascertained in a trial, arguing that since it had reached the stage of filing a chargesheet, some prima facie material existed.
The medical expert’s opinion quoted by the accused said, “I am firmly of the opinion that there is no evidence of negligence on the part of the obstetrician managing the case.”
“If the allegation of medical negligence is taken away as indicated in the expert’s opinion, the entire edifice on which the charge sheet is submitted goes. Therefore, if petitioners are compelled to face the prosecution for the aforesaid offences, no purpose will be served and if permitted, the same would amount to abuse of process,” the court said. “In the light of the expert’s opinion indicating that there was no negligence on the part of the petitioners, I am of the view that this is a fit case where proceedings are liable to be quashed,” it further added.
The bench also noted that as per the precedent of the case Jacob Mathew v State of Punjab, it was held that an investigating officer, before proceeding against doctors for rash and negligent acts, should first obtain an independent medical opinion from a doctor qualified in the relevant branch of medicine (ideally a government doctor).
You May Like
Photos
