New Delhi: The Supreme Court has issued notice on a public interest litigation (PIL) demanding statutory rules or executive instructions for criminal prosecution of doctors in cases of medical negligence. After hearing Senior Advocate Shadan Farasat, who appeared for the petitioner, the bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta passed an order stating, “Issue notice, returnable within four weeks.”
Petition Flags Two-Decade Delay After Jacob Mathew Judgment
The PIL, filed by the Sameeksha Foundation, highlights that despite the landmark Jacob Mathew judgment of August 5, 2005—where the Supreme Court directed the Union and State Governments to frame rules on prosecuting medical negligence—the required framework is still absent. The petition argues that this 20-year delay has severely hampered justice in cases involving preventable deaths due to medical negligence.
Concerns Over Biased Inquiry Committees
The petition questions the fairness of doctor-dominated inquiry committees that currently examine allegations of medical negligence. It states that without statutory rules or independent oversight, inquiries often lack impartiality. The plea notes that “doctors judging doctors” leaves victims’ families feeling helpless, as biased reports frequently favour the medical fraternity.
Data and Reports Highlight Systemic Gaps
Referencing an RTI response from the National Medical Commission, the petition points out that no guidelines have been framed to date. It also cites the 73rd Parliamentary Standing Committee Report (2013), which observed that medical professionals tend to be “very lenient towards their colleagues,” leading to negligible prosecutions. NCRB data showing only 1,019 medical negligence deaths recorded over six years in a population of 1.4 billion was described as “astonishing and unbelievable.”
Plea Seeks Multi-Stakeholder Inquiry Panels
To ensure fair investigations, the petition urges the Supreme Court to mandate multi-stakeholder inquiry committees comprising retired judges, civil society members, patient representatives, NHRC nominees, and independent experts. It contends that this structure would help eliminate bias seen in committees made up solely of doctors and ensure accountability in cases involving death due to negligence.
Demand for Time-Bound Rules and Accountability
The PIL requests the Court to direct immediate framing and notification of the statutory rules mandated in the Jacob Mathew judgment. The petitioner, through advocate Devansh Srivastava, argues that preventable hospital deaths cannot be dismissed as mere disciplinary concerns and must be treated as violations of the fundamental right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Recalling Supreme Court’s Earlier Guidelines
The petition revisits the Supreme Court’s earlier directions in the Jacob Mathew case, where the Court had provided interim guidelines. These guidelines require investigating officers to seek independent medical opinions—preferably from qualified government doctors—before proceeding against any medical practitioner. However, the absence of statutory rules continues to leave officers unclear on whom to consult for such expert opinions.
Attempts by MCI, NMC, and Union Health Ministry
The petition notes that the Medical Council of India had, in 2017, proposed the creation of specialised medical boards for negligence inquiries. The National Medical Commission reiterated this suggestion in 2021, recommending medical boards at district and state levels. In 2023, the Union Health Ministry acknowledged in an RTI response that it was considering long-pending demands for clear guidelines on medical negligence cases.
