The Doctors Post

Category: Negligence cases

Negligence cases

  • 25-Year-Old Woman Dies Hours After Normal Delivery at Bundi Government Hospital, Negligence Alleged

    25-Year-Old Woman Dies Hours After Normal Delivery at Bundi Government Hospital, Negligence Alleged

    A 25-year-old pregnant woman died within hours of a normal delivery at Bundi District Government Hospital after developing sudden medical complications, prompting allegations of medical negligence and a formal inquiry.

    Woman Dies Shortly After Delivery

    Allegations of medical negligence have surfaced following the death of a 25-year-old pregnant woman within hours of a normal delivery at Bundi District Government Hospital on Sunday morning.

    The deceased, a resident of Dhanatri village, had been admitted to the hospital on Friday, according to hospital authorities.

    Doctor Refutes Negligence Allegations

    Principal Medical Officer Dr LN Meena refuted the allegations of negligence, stating that the medical team made efforts to revive the woman but could not save her.

    Dr Meena said the woman had initially been advised a surgical delivery due to obstructed labour. However, after her family requested a normal delivery, treatment proceeded accordingly.

    Woman Developed Sudden Complications After Delivery

    The woman delivered her child at around 11 am. Shortly afterwards, both the mother and newborn reportedly showed signs of rapid deterioration.

    Within an hour of delivery, the woman complained of severe chest pain and collapsed as her condition became critical.

    Acting PMO Govind Gupta said the suspected cause of death was amniotic fluid embolism, a rare and potentially fatal medical emergency in which amniotic fluid or fetal cells enter the mother’s bloodstream, potentially causing pulmonary complications, sudden collapse and heart failure, reports PTI.

    The newborn was subsequently referred to JK Lone Hospital in Kota for further treatment.

    Nursing and Support Staff Transferred

    Following the incident, the hospital administration immediately transferred all labour room nursing and support staff who were on duty at the time of the incident.

    A formal inquiry has also been ordered to establish the circumstances surrounding the woman’s death.

    In addition, a mandatory maternal death audit involving three gynaecologists will be conducted to determine the exact sequence of events, according to hospital officials.

    Family Alleges Medical Negligence

    Following the woman’s death, her family members and villagers created a commotion on the hospital premises, alleging medical negligence.

    The protesters also stopped the ambulance carrying the woman’s body to the mortuary.

    Senior administrative officials and police personnel reached the hospital and attempted to pacify the family and assure them of a fair investigation.

    Post-Mortem Conducted, Body Handed Over

    The woman’s post-mortem examination was subsequently conducted in the presence of administrative officials.

    After completion of the post-mortem, the body was handed over to the family and transported to her native village in an ambulance.

    The formal inquiry and maternal death audit are expected to establish the circumstances surrounding the death and determine whether any medical or procedural lapses occurred.

  • Srinagar Hospital Patient Deaths: Seven-Member Panel Ordered to Probe Alleged Negligence

    Srinagar Hospital Patient Deaths: Seven-Member Panel Ordered to Probe Alleged Negligence

    A seven-member committee has been constituted to investigate the circumstances surrounding two reported patient deaths at Moj Gobur (Medlyn) Hospital in Chanapora, Srinagar. The Chief Medical Officer, Srinagar, has directed the panel to examine medical records and determine whether any negligence, lapse, delay in treatment or failure to follow standard protocols contributed to the reported outcomes.

    Inquiry Ordered Into Patient Cases

    The inquiry follows an incident reported a few days ago involving a woman who had been admitted to Moj Gobur (Medlyn) Hospital for a hysteroscopy and was later shifted to SMHS Hospital, where she died.

    However, officials have clarified that only one patient has died and that the second patient is alive and undergoing treatment in serious condition. The circumstances leading to the second patient’s admission and the reason for treatment are not known.

    Despite this clarification, the CMO’s order refers to both patients as having died and directs the committee to investigate the circumstances surrounding the two cases.

    Committee to Examine Medical Records

    The inquiry committee is headed by District Health Officer Srinagar Dr Rubina Maqbool. It has been instructed to examine the complete medical records of both patients, including treatment notes, operative details and laboratory investigations.

    The panel will reconstruct the sequence of events and assess the circumstances surrounding the two outcomes. It will specifically examine whether standard treatment protocols and post-operative monitoring procedures were followed.

    The committee has also been directed to assess the adequacy and availability of ICU and emergency support facilities at the hospital at the relevant time.

    Negligence and Treatment Delays Under Probe

    The committee will determine whether there was any delay, negligence, omission or other lapse in the diagnosis, treatment or emergency management of either patient.

    If any lapse is established, the committee has been authorised to fix responsibility and recommend appropriate action against those found accountable. It has also been asked to suggest corrective measures to prevent similar incidents in the future.

    The seven-member panel includes a gynaecologist, surgeon and anaesthetist from Gousia Hospital, Srinagar, along with officials from the Clinical Establishment Section, the CMO’s office and the PC&PNDT Wing.

    Report to Be Submitted Within Five Days

    Officials said the administration of Moj Gobur (Medlyn) Hospital, Chanapora, is cooperating with the inquiry committee during the proceedings.

    The inquiry comes against the backdrop of an earlier case in Srinagar involving the death of a woman following a hysteroscopy at a private IVF centre. The circumstances surrounding that death are also under investigation.

    The CMO has directed the committee to submit its detailed report, including its findings and recommendations, within five days of the issuance of the order.

    Important Highlights

    • A seven-member committee has been formed to investigate the reported patient deaths at Moj Gobur (Medlyn) Hospital, Chanapora.

    • Officials have clarified that one patient died while the second patient is alive and undergoing treatment in serious condition.

    • The committee will examine medical records, treatment notes, operative details and laboratory investigations.

    • The inquiry will assess possible negligence, treatment delays, omissions and compliance with standard treatment protocols.

    • The panel will also examine ICU and emergency support facilities available at the hospital.

    • The committee has been directed to submit its detailed report within five days of the order.

  • Roof Plaster Collapses on Woman at Rajasthan Government Hospital, Congress Alleges Negligence

    Roof Plaster Collapses on Woman at Rajasthan Government Hospital, Congress Alleges Negligence

    A 25-year-old woman was injured after a portion of the roof plaster at the Government Durgadutt Fatehpuria Maternal and Child Hospital in Sujangarh, Rajasthan, collapsed on her while she was leaving the facility on Wednesday afternoon. The incident has triggered criticism from the Congress, which accused the Rajasthan government of negligence and failure to maintain public infrastructure.

    The incident occurred at around 1:18 pm when the woman was reportedly leaving the hospital. A section of the ceiling plaster in the porch area suddenly fell on her, causing injuries. Hospital authorities said she required two stitches following the incident.

    Dr Purusottam Karwa, Principal Medical Officer, Sujangarh, said the hospital administration had already written to the Public Works Department (PWD) on August 4 regarding repair work. Another request was sent to the department following the incident.

    According to the hospital authorities, plaster had also come off in another room of the facility. However, Dr Karwa denied that the building had any widespread structural issue. Officials have called a mason to assess the damaged portion and determine whether it needs to be removed completely or repaired.

    The incident drew criticism from the Congress, which alleged that the condition of public facilities in Rajasthan reflected poor governance. The party claimed that people visiting hospitals for treatment were being exposed to risks because of deteriorating infrastructure. It also levelled allegations of corruption and neglect of public safety against the state government.

    Rajasthan Congress president Govind Singh Dotasra also criticised the government, alleging that deteriorating conditions in schools and hospitals reflected wider governance concerns. He described the incident as an example of the problems facing public infrastructure in the state.

    The state government had not issued a response to the allegations at the time of reporting.

  • Bihar Government Hospital Uses Medicine Carton as Temporary Splint for Fractured Leg, Inquiry Ordered

    Bihar Government Hospital Uses Medicine Carton as Temporary Splint for Fractured Leg, Inquiry Ordered

    A government hospital in Bihar’s Begusarai district has come under scrutiny after a viral video showed a road accident victim’s fractured leg being supported with pieces of a medicine carton. The incident at Manjhaul Sub-Divisional Hospital has triggered public criticism, while hospital authorities have defended the measure as a temporary splint used because conventional plaster facilities and an orthopaedic doctor were unavailable.

    Accident Victim Brought to Manjhaul Hospital

    The incident occurred after a motorcycle accident near Harsain Bridge on the evening of August 3. The injured man, a resident of Maheshwara village under Nawkothi police station, suffered a fracture in his leg and was brought to Manjhaul Sub-Divisional Hospital by local residents and relatives.

    According to the family, hospital staff placed pieces of a medicine carton on both sides of the injured leg and secured them with bandages and rope. The patient was subsequently referred to Sadar Hospital, Begusarai.

    A video showing the patient lying on a hospital bed with the carton strapped to his leg later went viral on social media, prompting criticism of emergency care arrangements at the facility.

    Hospital Calls It Emergency Splinting

    Hospital authorities defended the procedure, stating that the carton was used only as a temporary splint to immobilise the fractured limb and prevent further injury during transfer.

    Manjhaul Hospital in-charge Dr Abhinav Priyadarshi said the material was used as an emergency measure. He explained that immobilising a broken bone is necessary to restrict movement and prevent additional internal injury.

    The doctor said there was no orthopaedic doctor or dresser available at the time and that the hospital did not have plaster facilities. According to him, using available material to restrict movement and reduce pain while transferring the patient to a higher medical centre was consistent with emergency care practices.

    Civil Surgeon Orders Inquiry

    Begusarai Civil Surgeon Dr Ashok Kumar took note of the viral video and ordered an inquiry into the incident.

    Dr Kumar said the matter would be investigated and that action would be taken if anyone was found guilty. He also acknowledged that improvised materials can be used as temporary splints during emergencies but said the specific circumstances at the hospital would be examined.

    Inquiry to Examine Patient Care

    The inquiry will determine whether hospital staff followed appropriate emergency procedures while treating and referring the accident victim.

    Authorities will also examine whether there were any lapses in patient care and whether the absence of an orthopaedic doctor, dresser, and plaster facilities affected the treatment provided at the hospital.

    Important Highlights

    • A road accident victim with a fractured leg was treated with pieces of a medicine carton as a temporary splint at Manjhaul Sub-Divisional Hospital.
    • The patient was injured in a motorcycle accident near Harsain Bridge on August 3 and was later referred to Sadar Hospital, Begusarai.
    • Hospital authorities said the carton was used as an emergency splint because an orthopaedic doctor, dresser, and plaster facilities were unavailable.
    • A video of the treatment went viral on social media, prompting criticism of emergency healthcare arrangements.
    • Begusarai Civil Surgeon Dr Ashok Kumar has ordered an inquiry and said action will be taken if anyone is found guilty.
  • Five-Year-Old Boy Suffers Severe Burns at West Bengal Anganwadi Centre, Locals Allege Negligence

    Five-Year-Old Boy Suffers Severe Burns at West Bengal Anganwadi Centre, Locals Allege Negligence

    A five-year-old boy suffered severe burn injuries at an anganwadi centre in Bhangar, South 24 Parganas district of West Bengal, after allegedly spilling hot water on himself. The incident triggered protests by local residents, who accused those responsible for the centre of negligence and demanded an investigation into the circumstances.

    Child Sustains Severe Burn Injuries

    According to residents, the child was at the anganwadi centre when the incident occurred. Locals alleged that neither the designated cook nor any teacher was present at the centre at the time.

    They claimed that a representative was simultaneously looking after the children, teaching them, and preparing food when the incident took place.

    The child’s family said he suffered severe burns on his chest, arms, and other parts of his body. He was initially taken to Jiren Gacha Rural Hospital, where doctors referred him to R. G. Kar Medical College and Hospital in Kolkata for advanced treatment.

    The child is currently undergoing treatment, and his family said his condition remains extremely critical.

    Family Alleges Lack of Immediate Assistance

    The child’s father alleged that the anganwadi centre did not arrange treatment after the incident and that the family had to rush the child to hospital after receiving information about what had happened.

    The family has raised concerns over the arrangements at the centre and the measures in place to protect children from such incidents.

    Locals Stage Protest

    Following the incident, residents gathered outside the anganwadi centre and staged a protest, alleging negligence by those responsible for the safety of children.

    The protesters demanded a detailed investigation and strict action against anyone found responsible for the incident.

    Police personnel reached the spot to control the situation and have initiated an investigation. Officials are also examining whether appropriate safety measures and child protection guidelines were being followed at the centre.

    Locals Raise Concerns Over Repeated Incidents

    Some residents alleged that similar incidents had occurred at the centre in the past few months and questioned the safety arrangements.

    A local resident claimed that this was the fifth such incident in the last couple of months and demanded stern action against the teachers and cooks.

    The ongoing investigation will establish the circumstances that led to the accident and determine whether any negligence contributed to the child’s injuries.

    Important Highlights

    • A five-year-old boy suffered severe burn injuries at an anganwadi centre in Bhangar, South 24 Parganas.
    • The child allegedly sustained burns after spilling hot water on himself.
    • His family said he suffered severe burns on his chest, arms, and other parts of his body and remains in extremely critical condition.
    • Locals alleged that the designated cook and teacher were absent when the incident occurred.
    • Police have initiated an investigation, while officials are examining compliance with safety and child protection guidelines.
  • Patna High Court Quashes Cheating Case Against Doctor Over Disputed Medical Opinion

    Patna High Court Quashes Cheating Case Against Doctor Over Disputed Medical Opinion

    The Patna High Court has quashed criminal proceedings against a doctor accused of cheating and criminal breach of trust over a disputed medical opinion. The Court held that there was no prima facie evidence of dishonest intention or fraudulent misappropriation and reiterated that every breach of trust does not automatically constitute the offence of criminal breach of trust.

    Court Finds No Ingredients of Cheating, Criminal Breach of Trust

    Justice Sunil Dutta Mishra observed that the allegations against the doctor, even if accepted in their entirety, did not establish the essential ingredients of offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

    The Court noted that the dispute essentially arose from a medical opinion given by the doctor while performing her professional duties. It found no prima facie material indicating that the doctor had acted with dishonest intention or had committed criminal breach of trust.

    The High Court further reiterated the Supreme Court’s position that where allegations, even if accepted at face value, do not prima facie constitute an offence, or where continuation of criminal proceedings would amount to abuse of the process of law, the High Court can exercise its inherent jurisdiction to quash the proceedings.

    Patient Had Consulted Doctor Over Pregnancy Complications

    According to the case details, the complainant, an advocate by profession, visited the doctor’s clinic for pregnancy-related complications.

    After examining an ultrasound report brought by the patient, the doctor advised her to undergo medical termination of pregnancy for a prescribed fee. Although the patient deposited the fee, she later decided not to undergo the procedure following advice from her family members.

    The doctor subsequently prescribed certain medicines, which the patient consumed. She alleged that her health deteriorated after taking the medicines.

    Complainant Later Delivered Healthy Child

    The patient subsequently consulted another doctor and was allegedly informed that the foetus was healthy. She ultimately delivered a healthy child.

    Based on these circumstances, the complainant alleged that the petitioner-doctor had deliberately provided incorrect medical advice and retained the amount paid for the proposed procedure.

    The complaint led the Magistrate, after considering the complainant’s solemn affirmation and statements of inquiry witnesses, to find a prima facie case and take cognisance of offences under Sections 406 and 420 IPC.

    Doctor Challenged Criminal Proceedings

    The doctor challenged the Magistrate’s order before the Revisional Court, arguing that the allegations did not satisfy the legal requirements for cheating or criminal breach of trust.

    The Revisional Court dismissed the revision petition and upheld the Magistrate’s order. The doctor then approached the Patna High Court seeking quashing of the revisional order dated February 16, 2016, and all consequential criminal proceedings.

    A Coordinate Bench of the High Court had earlier stayed further proceedings before the S.D.J.M., Samastipur.

    Defence Argues No Dishonest Intention

    Before the High Court, counsel for the doctor argued that there was no entrustment of property, which is necessary to establish criminal breach of trust under Section 406 IPC.

    The counsel also submitted that there was no fraudulent or dishonest inducement or false representation by the doctor from the beginning of the transaction, which is necessary to constitute cheating under Section 420 IPC.

    It was further argued that the doctor was a qualified medical practitioner who had merely provided her professional opinion based on the ultrasound report presented by the complainant and prescribed medicines as part of the treatment.

    High Court Quashes Proceedings

    The High Court accepted the doctor’s contention that the allegations did not disclose the essential ingredients of Sections 406 and 420 IPC.

    The Court concluded that the dispute arose from the medical opinion provided during the course of professional duties and that there was no prima facie material demonstrating dishonest intention at the inception of the treatment.

    Accordingly, the High Court exercised its inherent jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceedings, holding that continuation of the case would amount to an abuse of the process of law.

    Important Highlights

    • The Patna High Court quashed criminal proceedings against a doctor accused under Sections 406 and 420 IPC.
    • The case arose from a disputed medical opinion concerning pregnancy-related treatment.
    • The Court found no prima facie evidence of dishonest intention or fraudulent misappropriation by the doctor.
    • The Court observed that every breach of trust does not automatically constitute criminal breach of trust.
    • The doctor had argued that she had provided professional medical advice based on the ultrasound report and had not made any fraudulent representation.
  • Kerala High Court: Expert Panel Reports in Medical Negligence Cases Are Opinion, Not Final Findings

    Kerala High Court: Expert Panel Reports in Medical Negligence Cases Are Opinion, Not Final Findings

    The Kerala High Court has held that reports submitted by the State Level Apex Body in medical negligence cases are only expert opinions and cannot be treated as final findings against doctors. Refusing to interfere with an expert panel’s report that found prima facie evidence of gross medical negligence in the death of a 10-year-old girl, the Court observed that such reports merely constitute expert evidence and their credibility must be tested during trial.

    High Court Clarifies Evidentiary Value of Expert Panel Reports

    A Division Bench comprising Dr. Justice A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Preeta A.K. observed that the opinions of Expert Panels investigating allegations of medical negligence are not conclusive findings against doctors.

    The Bench held that the reports are in the nature of expert evidence produced by the prosecution and can be challenged during cross-examination if relied upon during trial. The Court clarified that such opinions cannot, by themselves, be treated as established facts or findings prejudicial to the accused doctors.

    Case Pertains to Death of 10-Year-Old Girl

    The case arose from the death of a 10-year-old girl who was admitted to a hospital in Pandalam in August 2010 with complaints of abdominal pain and vomiting.

    According to the case records, she was administered Bigtum 600 mg IV along with Rantac 0.5 cc. Soon after, she reportedly developed complications and was shifted to the Intensive Care Unit before being referred to a hospital in Kochi on mechanical ventilation. She later died in the critical care unit, and the post-mortem examination recorded the cause of death as “choking.”

    Following a complaint alleging criminal medical negligence, an FIR was registered and the matter was referred to the Expert Panels constituted under the Kerala Government’s Circular dated June 16, 2008.

    Doctors Challenge Expert Panel Report

    Although earlier reports of the State Level Apex Body did not find material indicating criminal negligence, those reports were set aside in previous proceedings. Pursuant to directions of the High Court, the panel reconsidered the matter and, in its fresh report, expressed a prima facie opinion that there was gross medical negligence.

    The doctors challenged the report before the High Court. However, the Single Judge declined to interfere, holding that the Expert Panel’s report merely reflected expert opinion to assist the investigating agency and did not curtail the powers of the Investigating Officer under the Code of Criminal Procedure.

    The doctors subsequently filed an appeal before the Division Bench.

    Court Refers to Jacob Mathew Judgment

    Before the Division Bench, the doctors relied on the Supreme Court’s judgment in Jacob Mathew v. State of Punjab and Another, contending that medical negligence must be assessed differently from ordinary negligence.

    They argued that a mere error of judgment, lack of care, or an unsuccessful outcome does not amount to criminal negligence if the doctor has followed a practice accepted by the medical profession. The doctors also questioned the constitution of the Expert Panel.

    The complainant, however, argued that the Expert Panel’s report was only scientific expert evidence intended to assist the investigation and did not amount to a judicial finding against the doctors.

    Division Bench Upholds Single Judge’s Order

    The High Court observed that the two-tier Expert Panel mechanism was introduced by the Kerala Government in 2008 following the Supreme Court’s observations in Jacob Mathew to protect doctors from arbitrary or unwarranted criminal prosecution while ensuring that genuine complaints receive expert scrutiny.

    The Bench agreed with the Single Judge that the Expert Panel’s report is only expert evidence and cannot be treated as a final determination of guilt.

    Addressing the challenge to the constitution of the Expert Panel, the Court noted that the doctors had not questioned the panel’s constitution when earlier reports were favourable to them. It also observed that no material had been produced to cast doubt on the competence of the Apex Body.

    The Court further noted that although the incident occurred in 2010, the criminal trial had still not commenced even after 16 years.

    Important Highlights

    • The Kerala High Court held that Expert Panel reports in medical negligence cases are expert opinions and not final findings.
    • The Court refused to interfere with a report that found prima facie evidence of gross medical negligence against two doctors.
    • The case relates to the death of a 10-year-old girl following treatment at a hospital in 2010.
    • The Division Bench observed that Expert Panel opinions can be tested through cross-examination during trial.
    • The Court upheld the Single Judge’s order and noted that the criminal trial has not commenced even after 16 years.
  • Nellore Hospital, Cardiologist Directed to Pay ₹99 Lakh Compensation in Medical Negligence Case

    Nellore Hospital, Cardiologist Directed to Pay ₹99 Lakh Compensation in Medical Negligence Case

    The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (DCDRC), Kakinada, has directed a Nellore-based hospital and its cardiologist to pay ₹99 lakh in compensation to the family of a patient who died during treatment. The Commission held that the hospital and the treating doctor failed to justify administering dialysis to a patient with serious cardiac complications and found them liable for medical negligence.

    Consumer Commission Awards ₹99 Lakh Compensation

    Allowing the complaint in part, the Commission directed the hospital and the cardiologist to jointly and severally pay ₹99 lakh as compensation to the complainants.

    Out of the total compensation, ₹50 lakh has been earmarked for the deceased patient’s minor daughter. The Commission ordered that the amount be deposited in a fixed deposit in her name until she attains majority. It further permitted the child’s mother, as the natural guardian, to withdraw only the accrued interest periodically for the minor’s education, maintenance, and welfare.

    The Commission also awarded ₹10,000 towards litigation costs and directed the opposite parties to comply with the order within 45 days. Failing compliance, the awarded amount will carry interest at 9% per annum thereafter.

    Allegations of Negligent Treatment

    According to the complaint, the patient was admitted to the hospital on February 28, 2025, and was initially in a stable condition. The complainant alleged that the hospital and the treating doctor failed to properly diagnose the patient’s condition and administered inappropriate treatment, including dialysis despite the patient suffering from serious cardiac complications.

    It was further alleged that the patient’s condition deteriorated following the treatment, resulting in his death on March 2, 2025.

    The complainant also accused the hospital and the doctor of issuing false and manipulated medical records, failing to provide a proper explanation for the patient’s deteriorating condition, and giving evasive replies when questioned about the treatment. Seeking compensation for the loss of the family’s earning member, the complainant claimed ₹99 lakh as compensation, reimbursement of ₹3 lakh paid towards treatment, and litigation costs.

    Hospital Denied Negligence

    The hospital and the treating cardiologist denied all allegations of medical negligence and deficiency in service. They contended that the patient had been admitted in a critical condition with multiple co-morbidities, including uncontrolled diabetes, renal complications, and cardiac illness.

    According to the hospital, the treatment was provided in accordance with accepted medical protocols and dialysis was medically indicated and performed under expert supervision. The opposite parties also denied allegations of fabricated records, wrongful treatment, coercion, and suppression of facts.

    They further argued that the complainant had failed to produce expert medical evidence to establish negligence and relied on judicial precedents, including Jacob Mathew v. State of Punjab, Kusum Sharma v. Batra Hospital, Martin F. D’Souza v. Mohd. Ishfaq, and Dr. Neeraj Sood v. Jaswinder Singh, to submit that the death of a patient alone does not constitute medical negligence.

    Commission Finds Gaps in Hospital Records

    After examining the material on record, the Commission observed that the patient had been diagnosed with “Acute AWMI with Severe LVD,” indicating serious cardiac complications.

    The Commission also noted that the hospital failed to produce the complete medical case sheet of the patient. During cross-examination, the hospital’s own witness admitted that only progress notes and nursing notes had been produced, while important records such as admission notes, ICU charts, dialysis requisitions, nephrology and cardiology consultation records, investigation reports, consent forms, dialysis monitoring charts, medication charts, treatment protocols, and death records were not placed before the Commission.

    Questions Raised Over Dialysis Decision

    The Commission further observed that although the hospital claimed to have followed accepted medical standards, it relied on an ECG report relating to a period before the patient’s admission instead of producing a contemporaneous cardiac evaluation conducted during hospitalisation.

    It noted that no satisfactory explanation was provided for relying on the pre-admission ECG report, creating serious doubts regarding the adequacy of the patient’s assessment before administering critical treatment.

    During cross-examination, the hospital’s witness also admitted that, as per ICMR norms, dialysis should not be administered in cases of heart stroke. The witness, however, acknowledged that the patient had undergone dialysis twice.

    The Commission also took note of the allegation that dialysis had been performed without the advice of the treating nephrologist. Although the witness denied the allegation, he admitted that no document recommending dialysis by the nephrologist on February 28, 2025, had been produced before the Commission.

    Important Highlights

    • DCDRC, Kakinada directed a Nellore-based hospital and its cardiologist to pay ₹99 lakh compensation in a medical negligence case.
    • The Commission held that the hospital failed to justify administering dialysis to a patient with serious cardiac complications.
    • ₹50 lakh of the compensation has been reserved for the deceased patient’s minor daughter in a fixed deposit until she attains majority.
    • The Commission noted that the hospital failed to produce the complete medical records of the patient during the proceedings.
    • The hospital and doctor have been given 45 days to comply with the order, failing which the compensation will carry interest at 9% per annum.
  • Medical negligence allegations spark protest after 9-year-old boy dies at Bhubaneswar private hospital

    Medical negligence allegations spark protest after 9-year-old boy dies at Bhubaneswar private hospital

    Family blocks road near Shishu Bhawan Square demanding action; hospital denies negligence, police await postmortem report

    Tension prevailed near Shishu Bhawan Square in Bhubaneswar on Friday after the family of a nine-year-old boy, who died during treatment at a private hospital, staged a road blockade alleging medical negligence and demanding strict action against the hospital authorities.

    According to the family, the child, a resident of Samantarapur, was admitted to the private hospital on Thursday after complaining of severe headache and repeated vomiting. They alleged that his condition deteriorated during treatment, following which he was placed on ventilator support.

    The family further claimed that doctors later informed them the child had been brain dead for the past two days. On Friday morning, the hospital declared the minor dead.

    Accusing the hospital of negligence, the grieving family demanded action against the treating doctor and the hospital management. They also alleged that the hospital initially refused to issue a death certificate, stating that the child had not been declared clinically dead.

    The hospital administration denied all allegations of negligence. A doctor associated with the treatment stated that the child was brought to the hospital in a brain-dead condition and was managed according to standard medical protocols. The doctor further alleged that while the family initially wanted to shift the patient to another hospital, some individuals later entered the premises, misbehaved with the medical staff and demanded the immediate issuance of a death certificate.

    Following the child’s death, family members and supporters staged a protest outside the hospital and blocked the road near Shishu Bhawan Square, disrupting traffic for several hours and causing heavy congestion in the area.

    Police personnel reached the spot, pacified the protesters and restored normal traffic movement. Officials said the child’s body was sent to Capital Hospital for postmortem examination. They added that further legal action will be taken based on the postmortem findings and any formal complaint received from the family.

  • Former Maharashtra PHC Doctor Booked for Negligence After 9-Year-Old Girl Dies Following Anti-Leprosy Treatment

    Former Maharashtra PHC Doctor Booked for Negligence After 9-Year-Old Girl Dies Following Anti-Leprosy Treatment

    FIR alleges ex-medical officer failed to stop anti-leprosy medicines despite signs of liver damage; family claims child was wrongly diagnosed and treated without consent.

    A former medical officer at a Primary Health Centre (PHC) in Maharashtra’s Raigad district has been booked for alleged medical negligence following the death of a nine-year-old girl who reportedly suffered an adverse reaction to anti-leprosy medicines administered during a government screening campaign.

    According to police, the case relates to the death of a Class IV student from a government ashram school in Varvane village and a resident of Tambdi village. She was identified as a suspected leprosy patient during a health screening programme conducted at the PHC in Kamarli village and was subsequently started on multidrug anti-leprosy treatment under the state’s leprosy elimination campaign.

    During the course of treatment, the child reportedly developed persistent fever and her condition gradually deteriorated. She was admitted to multiple government hospitals before being referred to a tertiary care hospital, where she died on January 22, 2025.

    Police alleged that the former medical officer failed to discontinue the anti-leprosy medication despite the child developing warning signs during treatment. An FIR has been registered, alleging that the failure to take timely medical action contributed to the deterioration of her condition.

    The FIR also refers to the findings of a medical negligence committee constituted by the Alibaug District Hospital. In a report submitted in July 2026, the committee reportedly observed that laboratory investigations had indicated liver damage at an early stage of treatment. According to the report, the anti-leprosy medication should have been stopped immediately, but investigators found no evidence that the treatment was discontinued.

    Meanwhile, the girl’s family has alleged that she was wrongly diagnosed with leprosy and administered medication without obtaining their consent. They have also demanded an investigation into the role of other Health Department officials and the Integrated Tribal Development Project (ITDP) authorities in the matter.

    Police have registered a case against the former medical officer under Section 106(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), which pertains to causing death by a negligent act not amounting to culpable homicide. Investigators alleged that the doctor failed to follow accepted medical standards and necessary precautions, resulting in the child’s worsening health and subsequent death.

    Despite the registration of the FIR, the victim’s family launched an indefinite hunger strike outside the Pen Sub-Divisional Office, alleging that they had not been provided a copy of the FIR. The protest received support from local residents and activists, who demanded greater transparency and a comprehensive investigation into the case.