The Supreme Court said that the investigating officer before proceeding against the accused doctor should obtain an independent medical opinion from a qualified doctor in government service. It was also held that the accused doctor should not be arrested unless his arrest is necessary for furthering the investigation or for collecting evidences or the investigating officer is satisfied that the doctor would not make himself available to face the prosecution. Supreme Court: Sheilding the medical professionals from frivolous cases of medical negligence filed under section 304A IPC, the Court relying upon and quoting from Jacob Mathew v. State of Punjab, (2005) 6 SCC 1, said that the doctors are not immune from legal proceedings and hence, in the event of medical negligence while discharging their professional duties, it is necessary to protect doctors from frivolous and unjust prosecution, therefore, a private complaint would only be entertained when there are prima facie evidences before the court in the form of a credible opinion given by another competent doctor to support the charge of rashness or negligence on the part of the accused doctor. Adding to this, the Court said that the investigating officer before proceeding against the accused doctor should obtain an independent medical opinion from a qualified doctor in government service. It was also held that the accused doctor should not be arrested unless his arrest is necessary for furthering the investigation or for collecting evidences or the investigating officer is satisfied that the doctor would not make himself available to face the prosecution. In the present case, respondent’s husband died as the appellant was unsuccessful in performing angioplasty operation. The Court, relying upon the opinion given by Andhra Pradesh Medical Council and the Medical Council of India pertaining to the treatment of the deceased, said that appellant had made an attempt to do his best to save the deceased and hence, he was not liable for the offence of negligence. [A.S.V. Narayanan Rao v. Ratnamala, Criminal Appeal No.1433 of 2013, decided on September 13, 2013
Posted on: Tue, 17 Sep 2013 11:02:50 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015