This is an archive article published on December 4, 2024
HC restores trial court order: ‘Unsuccessful surgery does not imply medical negligence’
A bench of Justice Anil Kshetarpal was hearing an appeal filed by the Punjab government against the order of the first appellate court that granted the damages to the woman on the ground that she became pregnant after her sterilisation operation.
On hearing the matter the bench opined that in order to award damages in cases pertaining to medical negligence, the woman is required to lead positive evidence including the opinion of expert in appropriate cases.
Holding that medical negligence cannot be presumed just because a surgical procedure was not successful, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has set aside an order of a first appellate court that granted Rs 30,000 compensation, along with a 6 per cent interest per annum, to a woman who became pregnant after a sterilisation operation.
“The medical negligence cannot be assumed only because a surgical procedure has failed to achieve the desired result. The Supreme Court has held that in absence of allegation that the surgeon was not competent to perform the surgery or the surgeon was negligent, the suit for damages cannot be decreed,” said the high court.
A bench of Justice Anil Kshetarpal was hearing an appeal filed by the Punjab government against the order of the first appellate court that granted the damages to the woman on the ground that she became pregnant after her sterilisation operation.
Before the case went to the appellate court, a trial court had dismissed the woman’s plea in this regard. The trial court had found that the plaintiff (woman) gave birth to a child (female) after the sterilisation operation, but she failed to prove negligence of the doctor. The woman while appearing in evidence admitted that she went to the hospital for check-up on her “free will”, and before the operation, she filled a form signed by her wherein it (in the form) was stated that “she will not hold any doctor responsible for failure of the operation”, which was performed by a well-qualified and experienced surgeon.
The first appellate court, however, reversed the judgment by drawing an assumption that after the sterilisation operation, the respondent (woman) will not conceive another child. The appellate court further held that the state did not assert that the respondent (woman) was ever called for a follow-up to see whether the operation was successful or not. And thus, the first appellate court awarded Rs 30,000 in damages, along with a 6 per cent interest per annum, to the woman.
However, the state filed an appeal against the order of the first appellate court before the high court wherein it (state) contended that the operating surgeon or his employer cannot be held liable for compensation on account of unwanted pregnancy or unwanted child on failure of sterilisation operation in absence of evidence to prove that there was negligence on the part of surgeon while performing the surgery.
The state was represented by Salil Sabhlok, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab.
Story continues below this ad
On a court query, counsel representing the respondent (woman) admitted that no medical evidence has been produced to prove surgeon’s negligence. The respondent further admitted that she signed the form in which it was stipulated that the sterilisation operation may not give the desired result. The woman was represented by Advocate Pardeep Goyal.
On hearing the matter the bench opined that in order to award damages in cases pertaining to medical negligence, the woman is required to lead positive evidence including the opinion of expert in appropriate cases.
Justice Kshetarpal also held that the first appellate court had assumed negligence only on the basis of a presumption.
The bench added that from reading of the judgment passed by the trial court, it is evident that the operating doctor stated that no assurance was given to the respondent (woman) regarding the success of the operation and she was apprised of the fact that sometimes there is failure of the operation, for which, no medical authority will be held responsible.
Story continues below this ad
The high court thus allowed the appeal of the state and restored the order of the trial court.
Jagpreet Singh Sandhu is a Senior Correspondent at The Indian Express, based in Chandigarh. He is a veteran reporter with over a decade of experience, specializing in legal, crime, and environmental reporting across the tri-city area (Chandigarh, Mohali, and Panchkula).
Professional Background
Core Beat: He primarily covers the Punjab and Haryana High Court, District Courts, CBI Courts, and Consumer Commissions. His legal reporting is known for breaking down complex judgments and tracking long-standing criminal cases.
Environmental Reporting: Jagpreet has become a key voice in reporting on the deteriorating air quality and weather patterns in the Punjab-Haryana region.
Crime & Technology: He frequently reports on cybercrime, digital arrest scams, and the intersection of technology and law enforcement, such as the development of citizen-centric policing apps.
Recent Notable Articles (Late 2025)
His late 2025 coverage has focused on significant judicial verdicts, major financial scams, and public health concerns:
1. Legal & CBI Court Verdicts
"12 years on, CBI court acquits Haryana judge, parents in wife’s death case" (Dec 17, 2025): Detailed coverage of the acquittal of a judicial officer in a high-profile dowry death case from 2013.
"‘Wicked & evil mind’: Court gives man 30-year term for kidnapping, sexually assaulting 8-year-old" (Dec 16, 2025): A report on a stern judgment from a Chandigarh district court in a POCSO case.
"Man acquitted in rape case after victim found ‘very happy’ in wedding reception" (Dec 9, 2025): Covering a unique legal observation regarding consensual relationships and age verification.
2. Investigative & Scams
"CBI registers FIR in Rs 1.14-cr Patient Welfare Grant scam at PGIMER" (Dec 19, 2025): An exposé on how funds meant for poor patients were siphoned off through forged documents and a photocopy shop inside the PGIMER campus.
"Month-long torture, Rs 85 lakh transfers: How ‘Innocence Certificate’ led to a ‘digital arrest’ of an elderly couple" (Dec 12, 2025): Detailing a sophisticated cyber fraud targeting senior citizens in Chandigarh.
3. Environment & Public Safety
"Panchkula air turns ‘very poor’, fourth worst in country" (Dec 22, 2025): Reporting on the sudden spike in pollution levels in Panchkula compared to neighbouring cities.
"Soon, you can snap that overspeeding car, and report to Chandigarh Police" (Dec 16, 2025): Breaking news on a new mobile application being developed to allow citizens to report traffic violations via geo-tagged photos.
4. Gangster Culture & Crime
"City Beautiful in the crosshairs of gangsters" (Dec 14, 2025): A feature analysis of how Chandigarh has increasingly become a staging ground for extortion and rivalries between gangster modules.
"Shooters wanted for Parry murder held by Delhi Police Special Cell" (Dec 18, 2025): Following the developments in a high-profile murder case in Chandigarh’s Sector 26.
Signature Style
Jagpreet is recognized for his tenacious follow-up on cold cases and his ability to report on courtroom drama with a focus on victim rights. His work often highlights administrative lapses, whether in the handling of patient welfare funds or the enforcement of environmental standards. ... Read More
