Prayagraj: The Allahabad High Court has made sharp remarks on private hospitals and nursing homes, saying they use patients as ATM machines to make money.
The court refused to give relief to a doctor accused of medical negligence in a 2008 case, in which a foetus died due to alleged delay in surgery. The order was given by a bench of Justice Prashant Kumar while dismissing the petition of Dr Ashok Kumar Rai of Uttar Pradesh's Deoria district.
A case was registered on July 27, 2007 in which it was alleged that the pregnant wife of the complainant's younger brother was admitted to Dr Rai's nursing home. The family had agreed to a cesarean at 11 am, but the surgery was done at 5:30 pm, by then the fetus had died. It is alleged that when the family objected, the nursing home staff and colleagues beat them up.
The FIR also stated that the doctor took Rs 8,700 and demanded Rs 10,000 more. The doctor also refused to issue a discharge slip. The doctor moved the High Court seeking quashing of the entire proceedings.
The court after hearing the two sides refused to rely on the report of the medical board as it found that crucial documents such as operation theatre notes were not produced before the board. The court also found that the anaesthetist was called around 3.30 pm, indicating that the hospital lacked preparation and facilities.
"It is a case of pure accident where the doctor admitted the patient and did not perform the operation on time even after taking permission from the patient's family members for the operation as they did not have the requisite doctor (i.e. anaesthetist) to perform the surgery," the judge remarked.
The court cited Supreme Court judgments such as Dr Suresh Gupta vs State of Delhi and Jacob Mathew vs State of Punjab to hold that the protection afforded to doctors applies only when a professional has performed his duty efficiently.
The bench emphasised that criminal liability arises if ordinary care is not exercised by a doctor while treating a patient. The court termed it a "classic" case where the operation was delayed by 4-5 hours without any reason and the post-mortem report cited the cause of death of the foetus as "prolonged labour pain". The court said this fact clearly showed the doctor's intent to deceive the patient.
The court also acknowledged that medical professionals should be protected from frivolous suits, but reiterated that this protection would apply only if the medical professional has performed his duty efficiently.
The court said the time of admission of the patient, the time of surgery and the time of taking consent from the patient's family are three important aspects in the case which should be considered after presenting the evidence. Taking into consideration all these facts, the court found no ground to interfere in the matter and dismissed the petition.
