SC Says Billing Errors, Delay in Medical Records Do Not Amount to Criminal Offence
In a significant relief to Kolkata-based Narayana Health and its chairman, the Supreme Court of India has quashed a criminal complaint filed over alleged billing discrepancies and delay in providing medical records, observing that such disputes are primarily civil and service-related in nature and cannot automatically be treated as criminal offences.
A bench comprising Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Justice Alok Aradhe held that complaints relating to billing practices, medical records, and service deficiencies are intended to be addressed under statutory grievance redressal mechanisms and compensation provisions, rather than through criminal prosecution.
Case Related to Alleged Wrong Billing for HRCT Test
The matter arose after a complainant alleged that a Barasat-based hospital under Narayana Health had included charges of Rs 2,500 for an HRCT test that was allegedly never conducted during the treatment of his mother in 2021.
The patient had undergone surgery for a fractured femur bone and was discharged after four days of hospitalisation. Later, the complainant sought clarification regarding the billing and requested copies of medical records for insurance reimbursement purposes.
According to the hospital, the HRCT test was initially proposed but was ultimately not conducted as the patient’s condition did not require it. After the issue was raised, the hospital revised the bill and offered to refund the amount through bank transfer or direct collection.
Despite this, the complainant approached a Judicial Magistrate in Barasat alleging cheating, criminal breach of trust, conspiracy, and non-supply of medical documents.
Criminal Charges Invoked Against Hospital, Chairman and Staff
Based on the complaint, offences under Sections 406 (criminal breach of trust), 420 (cheating), and 120B (criminal conspiracy) of the IPC were invoked against the hospital, the company running it, its chairman, staff members, and a former employee. Provisions of the West Bengal Clinical Establishments (Registration, Regulation and Transparency) Act, 2017 were also cited.
The Magistrate issued summons to the accused persons, following which the hospital approached the Calcutta High Court seeking quashing of the complaint under Section 482 CrPC.
However, the High Court remanded the matter back to the Magistrate while making observations that a prima facie offence appeared to be made out. Challenging this order, the hospital moved the Supreme Court.
Supreme Court Finds No Ingredients of Cheating or Criminal Breach of Trust
While analysing the allegations, the Supreme Court observed that the essential ingredients required to establish offences under Sections 405 and 420 IPC were completely absent.
The bench noted that criminal breach of trust requires “entrustment” of property along with dishonest misappropriation, which was not present in this case.
The Court observed that the amount paid by the complainant formed part of a routine hospital bill and was not entrusted for any fiduciary purpose. It further noted that the hospital had voluntarily offered to refund the amount after discovering the billing error.
Regarding cheating allegations, the Court held that there was no evidence of dishonest intention from the beginning. The judges observed that the billing discrepancy appeared to be an inadvertent mistake rather than deliberate fraud.
Allegations of Criminal Conspiracy Also Rejected
The Supreme Court further ruled that the allegations of criminal conspiracy under Section 120B IPC were unsustainable since the foundational offences themselves were not made out.
The bench noted there was no material indicating any prior agreement or meeting of minds among the accused persons to commit an illegal act.
The Court also rejected observations made by the High Court regarding possible offences under Section 504 IPC, stating that general allegations regarding rude behaviour or discouraging the complainant from pursuing the matter further could not automatically amount to criminal intimidation or insult.
Service-Related Grievances Should Be Addressed Under Clinical Establishment Law
Importantly, the Apex Court clarified that grievances related to billing disputes, delay in providing medical records, and service deficiencies may still be pursued through civil remedies or under the West Bengal Clinical Establishments Act.
The bench observed that the legislative framework of the 2017 Act provides mechanisms for compensation and grievance redressal in cases involving patient care, transparency, and billing issues.
The Court stated that merely mentioning Section 34 of the Act in a complaint without demonstrating how a criminal offence was committed cannot justify criminal prosecution.
Supreme Court Quashes Entire Criminal Proceedings
Allowing the appeals filed by the hospital authorities, the Supreme Court quashed the criminal complaint as well as the Calcutta High Court order.
The Court held that even if all allegations in the complaint were accepted at face value, no criminal offence was disclosed under the invoked provisions.
However, the bench clarified that the complainant remains free to pursue appropriate civil or statutory remedies in accordance with law.
