New Delhi: The Supreme Court is set to hear a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking directions to the Centre and all State Governments to frame statutory rules for prosecuting cases of criminal medical negligence. The petition highlights that despite a clear mandate issued nearly two decades ago in the landmark Jacob Mathew judgment, no concrete rules have been framed to regulate criminal proceedings against doctors.
Two Decades of Inaction After Jacob Mathew Judgment
The PIL points to a “20-year-long inaction” by authorities, even though the Supreme Court had directed the Union and State Governments on August 5, 2005, to frame statutory rules or executive instructions governing the prosecution of doctors. The Jacob Mathew ruling had laid the foundation for a structured process to balance protecting doctors from frivolous cases while ensuring justice for victims of negligence.
Earlier Directions and Interim Guidelines
In the Jacob Mathew case, the Supreme Court had asked the Centre to consult the Medical Council of India (MCI) and draft statutory rules to address criminal medical negligence, given its serious implications for both patients and healthcare professionals. As an interim measure, the Court issued guidelines stating that investigating officers must secure an independent medical opinion before proceeding against a doctor, preferably from a government doctor qualified in the relevant specialty.
Lack of Framework Leaves Investigators Directionless
Despite these directions, the absence of statutory rules has led to confusion among investigating officers, who often do not know how to approach State Medical Councils for expert opinions. The MCI had passed a resolution in 2017 suggesting the formation of specialised medical boards, and the National Medical Commission (NMC), which replaced it, repeated the proposal in 2021. However, the Union Health Ministry acknowledged in a 2023 RTI reply that guidelines for determining medical negligence cases were still under consideration.
Concerns Raised by the PIL
The petition describes the prolonged delay as “disheartening and disappointing”, noting that the country has been waiting for the mandatory rules for more than 20 years. It also challenges the credibility of the existing inquiry system, where committees dominated by doctors evaluate allegations of negligence. Such committees, it argues, often fail to deliver unbiased findings.
Allegations of Bias and Low Prosecution Rates
According to the PIL, numerous patients die annually due to “gross medical negligence”, yet families remain helpless because the current system results in “doctors judging doctors”, leading to predictable outcomes that favour the medical fraternity. The plea cites an RTI reply from the NMC confirming that no guidelines have been framed so far. It also refers to a 2013 Parliamentary Standing Committee Report that observed that medical professionals are “very lenient towards their colleagues”, resulting in negligible prosecutions.
Data Highlights Low Reporting of Negligence Deaths
The petition flags NCRB data showing only 1,019 recorded deaths due to medical negligence over six years in a nation of over 1.4 billion people, calling the figure “astonishing and unbelievable”. The PIL 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.
PIL Seeks Urgent Supreme Court Intervention
Filed through advocate Devansh Srivastava, the PIL seeks time-bound directions to frame and notify the rules mandated in the Jacob Mathew judgment, create multi-stakeholder inquiry panels including retired judges, civil society members, patient representatives and independent experts, and establish accountability mechanisms to ensure impartial investigations. According to the Supreme Court’s causelist, a Bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta will hear the matter on Monday, December 1.
