Medical student alleges ragging, senior booked at Solan

Solan : The Dharampur police have registered a case of ragging against a doctor of MMU Medical College and Hospital, Sultanpur, after a post...
HomeLegal NewsExpert opinion in medical negligence only from expertise in the related medical...

Expert opinion in medical negligence only from expertise in the related medical branch – NCDRC

New Delhi:The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) exonerated Rajasthan Hospital and Dr. Gauri Panjabi, Anesthetist from charges of medical negligence after 25 years as the court observed that the expert opinion by forensic experts cannot be considered as they did not have the expertise in anesthesia.

The facts of the case is that the patient Dinesh Kumar Jain, aged 32 years was operated for intestinal obstruction. After the operation, while transferring, the patient suffered sudden cardio-respiratory arrest at around 4.10 pm. Later, he suffered second arrest at 7.45 pm and passed away after 30 minutes. The wife of the patient alleged negligence by the hospital and doctor as all the vitals of the patient was normal before the operation. The Hospital defended that the procedure was carried out without any complications and was successful. The Hospital further added that after the patient suffered cardiac arrest, CPR was performed as per the standard protocol. The State Commission had dismissed the case and hence it was challenged in the NCRDC.

In the NCDRC, Assistant Professor Dr. Ganesh Govekar and Dr. V. R. Patil, Tutor in Forensic Medicine B.J. Medical College, jointly gave their expert opinion which implicated the Rajasthan Hospital and Dr. Gauri Panjabi, Anesthetist of medical negligence. The experts opined that the death hadoccurred possibly due to surgical operation and / or Anesthesia; because all investigation reports done before operation were normal.

NCDRC outrightly rejected the expert opinion and viewed that such vague opinion without performing Post Mortem lead the commission nowhere. The expert opinion was to be considered as a presumptive as it did not have any evidentiary value to prove the case of medical negligence against the Hospital or the anesthetist.